From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09DA3820A1 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 10:39:12 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of mshinwell@janestreet.com) identity=pra; client-ip=38.105.200.229; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mshinwell@janestreet.com"; x-sender="mshinwell@janestreet.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of mshinwell@janestreet.com designates 38.105.200.229 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=38.105.200.229; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mshinwell@janestreet.com"; x-sender="mshinwell@janestreet.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@tot-dmz-mxout1.janestreet.com) identity=helo; client-ip=38.105.200.229; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mshinwell@janestreet.com"; x-sender="postmaster@tot-dmz-mxout1.janestreet.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiEBAERCKFImacjlnGdsb2JhbABbDoN/gmG+ZYEeHg4BAQEBAQYWCTyCJAEBBUABATcBDwsLDS4iEgEFARwGE4gCA5w0iwuESgEFjigGj2AHhB2UHoNaij+FPhgphAlA X-IPAS-Result: AiEBAERCKFImacjlnGdsb2JhbABbDoN/gmG+ZYEeHg4BAQEBAQYWCTyCJAEBBUABATcBDwsLDS4iEgEFARwGE4gCA5w0iwuESgEFjigGj2AHhB2UHoNaij+FPhgphAlA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,845,1371074400"; d="scan'208";a="25786678" Received: from mx5.janestreet.com (HELO tot-dmz-mxout1.janestreet.com) ([38.105.200.229]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 05 Sep 2013 10:39:09 +0200 Received: from tot-oib-smtp1.delacy.com ([172.27.22.15] helo=tot-smtp) by tot-dmz-mxout1.janestreet.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VHV5m-00052u-JQ for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 04:39:06 -0400 Received: from tot-dmz-mxgoog1.delacy.com ([172.27.224.14] helo=mxgoog2.janestreet.com) by tot-smtp with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VHV5m-0000z1-IQ for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 04:39:06 -0400 Received: from mail-vc0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]) by mxgoog2.janestreet.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VHV5m-0004jp-EV for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 04:39:06 -0400 Received: by mail-vc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id gd11so893819vcb.5 for ; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 01:39:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=janestreet.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=eJn+Q9GFgi+Z2lVg4+7FBnFBlHgWb39LE1KFoybUUG4=; b=cJQsROD6tLHnRygYWVFZKGHjJ4Kdtor0DyiIZGDoxKdCLVpftBes3lq56IVu4UaNsD 88hz1Pcb07lmLOyRvrGe7b0RJuuQng21a2lV0WAL8U8o2fFe3Hs6lkHjYzJ3Us6I4r/M wdx2QxZs5T1nB2+K83MnPBHADiTinBqRu+fBk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=eJn+Q9GFgi+Z2lVg4+7FBnFBlHgWb39LE1KFoybUUG4=; b=gmtf1e19WDVvPxh/sV++oVOQDNTOuEf2Adxs9nqPGzhlP6uExJP/WdBtuKa310qfd4 9pTCfsA5a6+QDmG+ajoQuIMTQyu1YrDIKTHgBXI3bvTzQsisDpJcjkVGWrTAsSoC4FeA HnNUa4wGBtO1MO4ybGWLSmTtnUKaPWR38UKbA1V+N/LX0uv+IMCylG3IfvKmHdWHUphN XanM9Tb2enP8iTMHkb6/kHBnJvpVwy+VCAzjodGt9N776dGpSXtY1k97r3FUohOZtUR0 ARcfer7t3N/dBR7fFAOzAovVKnPU/f2lmascftpI8tI4J06MgZ7Wn/6sdRZjSBpdLdCR Hqqg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQms7a7CDc2LsiTFFzT0ScjbrqGSI03bAmU4CMIS3EGfraucP/O/U/NGC7z4BVnftzZ+SbnxyOKkmW5eTTYv6pOzKWSJD81uEx15iDyXvkswGNYSSUW0q02U1q9x5ZSRE2KO+9bF5tNGtMutG7wHiRAM/Ae4aw== X-Received: by 10.58.146.71 with SMTP id ta7mr6045573veb.23.1378370346292; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 01:39:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.146.71 with SMTP id ta7mr6045568veb.23.1378370346229; Thu, 05 Sep 2013 01:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.228.162 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 01:39:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0632AAE4-0DEA-4905-8F70-0646DE62E947@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> References: <0632AAE4-0DEA-4905-8F70-0646DE62E947@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 09:39:06 +0100 Message-ID: From: Mark Shinwell To: Jacques Garrigue Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= , caml list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Validation-by: mshinwell@janestreet.com Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Stability of order between polymorphic variants On 5 September 2013 09:24, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > As was pointed by some, the hashing function ensures that all constructor names up to 4 characters may not conflict, on all architectures. > It also preserves the order in that case. > Since there is no reason to change this hashing function, I suppose you can rely on that. This seems quite fragile. If you're going to rely on that, I'd suggest having a unit test. Mark