From: Jeremy Yallop <jeremy.yallop@ed.ac.uk>
To: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com>
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Type_of?
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:12:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <477FBA78.8060400@ed.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <712252.79789.qm@web54603.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Dario Teixeira wrote:
> So, imagine I have a module with only two functions. The first, "make_doc",
> uses XHTML.M and its signature is therefore quite complex. This is what
> "ocamlc -i" tells me:
[...]
> The second function, "unpickle_doc", uses the Marshal module to deserialise
> from a string a previously pickled doc. This is the definition of this
> function: (note that I've used copy & paste of the previous output of
> "ocamlc -i" to provide the explicit type annotation)
[...]
> Now, this works fine. It is however error prone, since if the signature
> of make_doc changes somewhat and I forget to update the type annotation in
> unpickle_doc, then I get a nasty runtime segfault. So this is my question:
> since the return type of make_doc is known at compile-time, is there any
> way I can tell the compiler that the return type of unpickle_doc should be
> the same as make_doc's?
One way is to use both functions in a context which requires the return
types to be the same. For example, you could use both functions to
create the elements of a list:
let rec unpickle_doc str =
let _unify_return_types _ = [unpickle_doc ""; make_doc ""] in
Marshal.from_string str 0
Jeremy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-05 17:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-05 16:41 Type_of? Dario Teixeira
2008-01-05 17:12 ` Jeremy Yallop [this message]
2008-01-05 17:43 ` [Caml-list] Type_of? Arnaud Spiwack
2008-01-05 20:33 ` Type_of? Zheng Li
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-04-18 9:18 type of == Christophe DEHLINGER
2005-04-18 11:27 ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2005-04-18 12:11 ` Andreas Rossberg
2005-04-18 13:10 ` Christophe DEHLINGER
2005-04-18 14:28 ` Jon Harrop
2005-04-18 16:16 ` Remi Vanicat
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=477FBA78.8060400@ed.ac.uk \
--to=jeremy.yallop@ed.ac.uk \
--cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
--cc=darioteixeira@yahoo.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox