From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <milanst@gmail.com>
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71CC07EE5B
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Wed, 14 May 2014 22:57:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  milanst@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.213.170;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="milanst@gmail.com";
  x-sender="milanst@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of
  milanst@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.170 as permitted
  sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.213.170;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="milanst@gmail.com";
  x-sender="milanst@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible;
  x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mail-ig0-f170.google.com) identity=helo;
  client-ip=209.85.213.170;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="milanst@gmail.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@mail-ig0-f170.google.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al8BADLYc1PRVdWqlGdsb2JhbABZhC2CaMMGAYEeCBYOAQEBAQcLCwkSKoIlAQEFIx0BGxAKAwEDDAYFCw0CAiYCAiIBEQEFARwGE4gsAQMRoC2MEVGDDZooChknDWSFVhEBBQyBHo0kB4J1gUsEmVGRIxgphQIh
X-IPAS-Result: Al8BADLYc1PRVdWqlGdsb2JhbABZhC2CaMMGAYEeCBYOAQEBAQcLCwkSKoIlAQEFIx0BGxAKAwEDDAYFCw0CAiYCAiIBEQEFARwGE4gsAQMRoC2MEVGDDZooChknDWSFVhEBBQyBHo0kB4J1gUsEmVGRIxgphQIh
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,1054,1389740400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="73714724"
Received: from mail-ig0-f170.google.com ([209.85.213.170])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 14 May 2014 22:57:34 +0200
Received: by mail-ig0-f170.google.com with SMTP id r10so7655904igi.3
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Wed, 14 May 2014 13:57:33 -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;
        bh=KIWVf6RehuqKBWcvattCl+LHK/t2cN4sF5uQ/skxsj8=;
        b=wpDYtQhHzBT3ITlxrbP8wY9ucCGMn3ItjaWKhFgibBdNiPndkIBsNgPrM4IBS6WB1A
         G5oRI3IF9IeGyvIV9GXWlc6Ld/UMVPVWWbIS4+sDd6llQTE4KsA2dPhW2T58KUs/Qcup
         47o4J5yeDsH9JPphPb46zevGFcQbyXczbrqtHNR75cTuWYs1WKuz9BKJf1Zp/7O1PuqP
         VWZVRtSrUr5x9y16uo3KaXDzbhZ0RKjzQs0zcUJ+y0RPrTDgxS0BO7JnCevCPtL8n4sV
         IiCo9NBI08qjcLij1NvIvHGHhDT1xUkEfXZSN1n9MVxnNQcp2nQfMrwPcisMIgh/oYcb
         fp4Q==
X-Received: by 10.50.79.202 with SMTP id l10mr68052474igx.23.1400101053435;
 Wed, 14 May 2014 13:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.141.114 with HTTP; Wed, 14 May 2014 13:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5373B924.9020206@lexifi.com>
References: <CAKR7PS92EjrW60hD3+MCUpaog1abdSsByi-H+RCg1iOWrcT_NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANhEzE7V9HKj9Y_yqbR72o0hKg-HvvvBRDyEo9BRTxB3LbcP9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANhEzE5=XeqJGGRAcnheQAL--BYhQM-BSh2+qA6YObDC7703jg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKR7PS_U4trQ0yhJ5vXyqKHNLS8SsayOOEG_32DP=SAQQv55xA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANhEzE7rvy1dbEADy1bV5AhJWt4oBrt_2Gt3ks-Bmd-6mmDM3g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKR7PS8mE6rrA-mjRyNX4BcFusRaOvcvxw0q3NR1zu5aEUPEHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5373B8C5.2000804@frisch.fr> <5373B924.9020206@lexifi.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Milan_Stanojevi=C4=87?= <milanst@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 16:56:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKR7PS9T+rUPv3MG-KKn-um7zdC3nDVanUzD+fC_Yi0zyc26SA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com>
Cc: Jeremie Dimino <jdimino@janestreet.com>, Caml List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] open extensible types representation

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com> wrote:
> On 05/14/2014 08:41 PM, Alain Frisch wrote:
>>
>> One could think about improving that, for instance by matching first on
>> the constructor name (relying on the new much-improved compilation for
>> pattern matching on strings).  But this doesn't work in presence of
>> constructor rebinding (which can change the name).
>
>
> Well, of course, one could always use this technique as a fast path and use
> linear search as fall back.  It's not clear that the gain justifies the
> extra effort.

And linear search is likely faster for a small number of variants.

The rebinding of constructors is interesting. What are uses case apart
from reducing verbosity in some cases?