From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q2L929iD019685 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:02:09 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhsCAO+XaU/RVdK2mGdsb2JhbABEtnUIIgEBAQEBCAkNBxQnggkBAQEEEgIsARsdAQMMBgULDS4iAREBBQEcBhMih2iZagqME4JxhSE/iHYBBQuQdgSVX45IPYQK X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,621,1325458800"; d="scan'208";a="137061749" Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com ([209.85.210.182]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 21 Mar 2012 10:02:03 +0100 Received: by iahk25 with SMTP id k25so2186489iah.27 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:02:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z+kM5yKdzzonYRLbeZ2lPvqsfK3sW4MU5RPFYY1MR8k=; b=E45wu3mkVrJuekte2Zg+GqYnZoLUtGPVTlpk3D59Azbvemo3csCaf0t+9fDpdY6Fvi qN2uTRTFllxnzH0SFw4F3UXQSdGKLUZZyfJ8lrK1uvNTsAKrn4sa3gr/0oyQelnwX15W CyQOS2AF1a7iQOaghJGcLPono/8+APOjRIfsX8H9rnx7l5jk0uzjg/dt/tvBpA+1/5bN 6vsX9Xip4Kw0BMN/MJfg/+i3R2S16fEX6shVHM8F8gynN1MjiHURt4axxvCjYONOD7Ki /AE5PPCTn0W/MSdEgfa8lW24hf1HDsRvc+fs2I/iESLfZtRdP1yEAgCMVH1d/uGV+QpK 7p1Q== Received: by 10.50.202.105 with SMTP id kh9mr11060154igc.68.1332320522357; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:02:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.223.65 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 02:01:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <3EB8D30A-FB02-4654-9F95-B7FF029F02FE@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> From: Thomas Braibant Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:01:42 +0100 Message-ID: To: Alan Schmitt Cc: caml users Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by walapai.inria.fr id q2L929iD019685 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Explicitely named type variable and type constraints. On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Alan Schmitt wrote: > On 21 mars 2012, at 09:21, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > >> (using 4.00, but you can also write with (val …)) > > Nice teaser ;-) > Indeed, this is the second time I see an OCaml 4.00 mentionned (once here, and once on the OCamlPro webpage, with an ETA ;)). Is it the same future version of OCaml as the former 3.13, or is it something different ? Thomas