From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C50EBB81 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:02:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j6O82XjA003597 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:02:34 +0200 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA24909 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:02:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from wetware.wetware.com (wetware.wetware.com [209.218.58.1]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j6O82WP0003594 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:02:32 +0200 Received: from [69.12.155.90] (helo=[10.0.1.5]) by wetware.wetware.com with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DwbRP-0005gK-IA for caml-list@inria.fr; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 01:02:31 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v733) In-Reply-To: <42E342FE.6060408@barettadeit.com> References: <42E2393B.5030209@inria.fr> <42E342FE.6060408@barettadeit.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: james woodyatt Subject: Re: [Caml-list] "Just say no!" campaign against Obj Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 01:02:32 -0700 To: Ocaml Trade X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.733) X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42E34B1A.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42E34B18.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; woodyatt:01 jhw:01 wetware:01 caml-list:01 baretta:01 recursion:01 arrays:01 elided:01 recursive:01 compiler:01 woodyatt:01 jhw:01 wetware:01 campaign:98 2005,:98 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On 24 Jul 2005, at 00:27, Alex Baretta wrote: > > At the end, I must say experiencing polymorphic recursion was well > worth the pain that came from using Obj.magic. Well, you know what Timothy Leary said about teaching the young about drugs... the correct message to send is "Just Say Know." I strongly believe this, so it was I was happy to see Xavier come out with: "For instance, the following implementation of 'magic' arrays will eventually cause the GC to crash: . You don't understand why? Then, don't use Obj.magic." I have been known to use Obj.magic. I understand that recursive modules are a new way to avoid some of the old uses for which I have put that construction. Some day, I will reform my old code and make it safe for public review. Still, I'm glad that Obj.magic is there and has the effect it does. But I don't blame Xavier for wanting to ban its use in problem reports for the compiler team. -- j h woodyatt markets are only free to the people who own them.