From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA27090; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 16:15:52 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA28682 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 16:15:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from herd.plethora.net (herd.plethora.net [205.166.146.1]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i8TEFm18030757 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 16:15:50 +0200 Received: from bhurt.plethora.net (bhurt.plethora.net [205.166.146.49]) by herd.plethora.net (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i8TEFdJM014653 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:15:46 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:26:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: bhurt@localhost.localdomain To: Jon Harrop cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Observations on OCaml vs. Haskell In-Reply-To: <200409281902.02687.jon@jdh30.plus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 415AC394.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 observations:01 haskell:01 2004:99 run-time:01 run-time:01 ocaml:01 sep:01 polymorphic:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:03 wrote:03 arguments:03 types:03 usefull:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Tuesday 28 September 2004 08:22, Ville-Pertti Keinonen wrote: > > I'm fairly certain that type safety is a significant part of the reason; > > if they were polymorphic, they'd accept any kind of arguments, not just > > numbers. What's the product of two strings? A run-time type error? > > It seems odd then, that the polymorphic comparisons do raise run-time type > errors (on functions). I guess that's just the way the cookie crumbled... > > I think a static analysis program to pick up on such problems could be very > useful... This gets tricky, I would think. One thing I don't want to lose is the ability to make ('a -> 'b) list types. Comparing two functions is obviously bogus, but in most other places being able to handle both functions and data is a usefull thing. -- "Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." - Gene Spafford Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners