From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 482447ED26 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 12:04:11 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvQEAMgpz0/UTWUHk2dsb2JhbABFswIDgSsiAQEBAQkJKAQjglcIAQE2AjsWGAMCAQIBWAgCh3gBAw+jVYQuAQWEex4sIYk0Bot5gh6DFppdjRw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,723,1330902000"; d="scan'208";a="146742587" Received: from mx3.wp.pl ([212.77.101.7]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 06 Jun 2012 12:04:10 +0200 Received: (wp-smtpd smtp.wp.pl 8789 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2012 12:04:09 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wp.pl; s=1024a; t=1338977049; bh=98Nvnzmzu08nxemWFjdZQ8GDCICUz6AmGv4K0Tvk5OM=; h=From:To:Subject; b=wZo7R24GtxDclmBh/0Bn3oeEPWyqtk/aPaaOKb2OzrHBFveYLdvWyuyQLs66CQfvl okyFxNkFYF6pGbnDdG4ApT6pjBGlT88zmDtJhtko0dnDjI9OCFkyFbWy54DF1Kj9T9 gaKg0RXGd9kLh7Xd6uVy062DXgAJq3WVBxgbO8i8= Received: from ifjdh235.ifj.edu.pl (HELO [10.10.2.32]) (d0@[149.156.47.235]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp.wp.pl (WP-SMTPD) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 6 Jun 2012 12:04:09 +0200 Message-ID: <4FCF2B1F.4050902@wp.pl> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:04:15 +0200 From: Dawid Toton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.4) Gecko/20120510 Icedove/10.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-WP-AV: skaner antywirusowy poczty Wirtualnej Polski S. A. X-WP-SPAM: NO 0000000 [wYO0] Subject: [Caml-list] Numbered modules in error messages Is it possible to make use of the numbers the compiler shows in the message below? What triggers this formatting? Error: This expression has type O/3119.dexpr = O/3119.decor * O/3119.expr but an expression was expected of type O/1730.dexpr = O/1730.decor * O/1730.expr Type O/3119.decor = O/3119.decor_fst * Static.t is not compatible with type O/1730.decor = O/1730.decor_fst * Static.t Type O/3119.decor_fst = Keep_defs.P.O.decor_fst is not compatible with type O/1730.decor_fst = Indirloc.t I'm asking this, because from time to time I deal with error messages like "type abc is not compatible with abc" with both abc being exactly the same strings. I'm wondering whether it is possible to force the compiler to say something more, to explain the difference between these types. Dawid