From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA06426 for caml-redistribution; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 18:26:45 +0100 (MET)
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA22742 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 11:30:34 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mail4.microsoft.com (mail4.microsoft.com [131.107.3.122])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA01177
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 11:30:32 +0100 (MET)
Received: by mail4.microsoft.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2524.0)
	id <15AVFM57>; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 02:30:33 -0800
Message-ID: <39ADCF833E74D111A2D700805F1951EF0F00B9B3@RED-MSG-06>
From: Don Syme <dsyme@microsoft.com>
To: "'Christopher Jeris'" <cjeris@math.mit.edu>, caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: RE: anonymous record types in variants
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 02:30:23 -0800
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2524.0)
Sender: weis


FTR, I've also had a few situations where it seemed most natural to write
similar constructs, but I couldn't.

Cheers,
Don
> 
> The argument of a variant type constructor cannot be an 
> anonymous record
> type, i.e.:
> 
>   type foo = One of {one: int} | Two of {two: string}
> 
> is rejected at the first {.  Of course this is easy to work 
> around, just
> give the record types names:
> 
>   type foo_one = {one: int}
>   type foo_two = {two: string}
>   type foo = One of foo_one | Two of foo_two
> 
> But, just out of curiosity, is there a quick explanation of 
> why it is this
> way?
> 
> thanks & peace,
> 
> Chris Jeris	MIT math grad student and novice OCaml music programmer
>