From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 3EF027EE4C for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:08:54 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of gdsfh1@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.216.44; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gdsfh1@gmail.com"; x-sender="gdsfh1@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of gdsfh1@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.44 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.216.44; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gdsfh1@gmail.com"; x-sender="gdsfh1@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-qa0-f44.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.216.44; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="gdsfh1@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-qa0-f44.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: An0EALGeRVLRVdgsnGdsb2JhbABahBGCY0aKJwOyeIEUCBYOAQEBAQEGDQkJFCiCJQEBBAEjHQEbHgMBCwYFCwMMAiYCAiIBEQEFARwGiAYBAwkGnCGMAVGDCoNASgoZJw1kiQABBQyBHY4vgmqBNgOJM45MkA4YKYRQOQ X-IPAS-Result: An0EALGeRVLRVdgsnGdsb2JhbABahBGCY0aKJwOyeIEUCBYOAQEBAQEGDQkJFCiCJQEBBAEjHQEbHgMBCwYFCwMMAiYCAiIBEQEFARwGiAYBAwkGnCGMAVGDCoNASgoZJw1kiQABBQyBHY4vgmqBNgOJM45MkA4YKYRQOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,993,1371074400"; d="scan'208";a="34645191" Received: from mail-qa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.216.44]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 27 Sep 2013 17:08:51 +0200 Received: by mail-qa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id j7so552581qaq.3 for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:08:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=jv7IBAhtNbkUxlzsE+2+CGZt344+oln81dnovNtOMzg=; b=sliiTh35b4EebgoxsslZz6ZDhCel7FO6PkPTZ/7po51kroxdc9GpfdyU1ZESoIB1/U 2msPJg42cEXSaNH/LHwo06jxSQNaXEnBxQOP5NaI+K4eikZ0ez7ynprPbEE8KQNQE9v5 6JF/GrjFfiBjmV/QzkCAbAhwY3HFeztmeiNCJiLJ9gsbdzK7Sq14wfTvlmjnBy/5fjlF 8c2yuBzMi7wStmk2n6Gk2mz4KS3B5PEXChKx0HUKemcjsN7+NKWAMxVa5XozsmdEBvDD SlXVBC0tf8HiIs58n+Wmg6Ws2odv5jnKkDkusQkI8VPs/T8q6EUVdiVdxRB0mqswtCS4 //Eg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.174.3 with SMTP id r3mr9670639qcz.10.1380294531299; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.42.70 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 08:08:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 18:08:51 +0300 Message-ID: From: Dmitry Grebeniuk To: Yotam Barnoy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Proposal: re-design of ocaml headers Hello. Can you please share your experience of writing bindings to some C libraries for ? How it compares to writing bindings for OCaml? (this is a thread about runtime values representation, I suppose.) Why will anyone ever need more than 200 constructors of a sum type? (also note the presence of polymorphic variant types.) > random access to this data is never needed mkay... :[