From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nicolas.pouillard@gmail.com>
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95893BBAF
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sun,  8 Aug 2010 22:53:35 +0200 (CEST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AisCAJy1XkxKfVK0kGdsb2JhbACgPAgVAQEBAQkJDAcRAx+nR4kQghGFAC6IVAEBAwWFNQSEJg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,338,1278280800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="55211592"
Received: from mail-wy0-f180.google.com ([74.125.82.180])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Aug 2010 22:53:35 +0200
Received: by wya21 with SMTP id 21so11045479wya.39
        for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:subject
         :to:cc:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-id;
        bh=Pn1qqILp4mZapfIeTIsgRzCmhesViV/gn8by7whKivI=;
        b=lIB0CCSciv64MEFPHFFvBcA9G1U0fdnfZYSfX5BCJBTlCxkpPPNeopMbygvr+PtbaN
         7gAvJjSxEKPFdVMhJkCjqZZEd3K5Ij9qxOG1zFi52n9EAUrcM8Y6UucAfma5b3Vlg0F7
         0DhWDfbxRya+GsDBtEg6ifoesYlsAZYW4WqaE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:subject:to:cc:in-reply-to:references
         :mime-version:content-type:content-id;
        b=kHHj3X1QJfbf+G0NUndIGU1PDdtXIpjNPHkAM4QrDvYPPExcA5+xpqv3eiXEY9y8oq
         K026XmrXpmHcEXZhz+11WaqgaRQdOCaH9yyT1FpmTseOGQlmmeiNcCMVqdpVLEnd91IN
         7SP/KpSodC3z09ox3WGADMRLsllX82PvOpJ0Y=
Received: by 10.227.133.66 with SMTP id e2mr12977375wbt.132.1281300814936;
        Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (sk.feydakins.org [94.23.4.142])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l6sm2165202wed.25.2010.08.08.13.53.34
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4c5f194e.8644d80a.7fef.69e6@mx.google.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Nicolas Pouillard <nicolas.pouillard@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] interest in a much simpler, but modern, Caml?
To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>, Jeremy Bem <jeremy1@gmail.com>
Cc: caml-list List <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <87bp9dkkca.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
References: <AANLkTi=UuefVu9CmwwomimGzMqFrks5SZ+227Znv5r+z@mail.gmail.com> <877hk1m1df.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <AANLkTi=L07p_xN7DCZQn0j+iy=-_7FzCrTm6KOf6oaJU@mail.gmail.com> <87bp9dkkca.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <7535.1281300813.1@sk.feydakins.org>
X-Spam: no; 0.00; 0200,:01 notation:01 equality:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:01 syntactic:01 caml-list:01 int:01 caml:02 florian:03 overhead:04 fix:05 comparison:05 simpler:05 matching:05 

On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 20:52:53 +0200, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * Jeremy Bem:
> 
> > Yes and no, respectively.  In other words, nothing new here.
> 
> Oh.  I just happen to think that those two are very high on the list
> of things you want to fix once you can start with a clean slate.
> 
> > Is there a better approach to polymorphic equality floating around?
> 
> Besides type classes?  I'm not sure.  It's probably possible to remove
> this feature from the language, with a little bit of syntactic
> overhead to pass around a matching comparison function.

Yes for instance the very concise local opening notation comes in handy here:

if Int.(x = 42) then ... else ...

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard
http://nicolaspouillard.fr