From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tom.primozic@gmail.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE,
	SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3
Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C25E8BC0B
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:32:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170])
	by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0GKWFTi017081
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:32:15 +0100
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id q2so1940554uge
        for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:32:13 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type;
        b=klrAbX3T2Lv2e1jsrXUfFxNMXp3K4eR1KWI8gCXA7eC5TLDkQP0OzfQYZjp6Xb0wfMXJ7a+bD63NMkjgOHsQs4GGz0Q63lTLPxV81CfJygTZ7QW5IJ+WenD82cmhfhRXuXzSgqBRWHOReWArQ9ud7OoUqyUBvKUyC+1Nal6vDq8=
Received: by 10.82.116.15 with SMTP id o15mr1347024buc.1168979530959;
        Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.82.175.13 with HTTP; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:32:10 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <c1490a380701161232u7b60e286l163a4a5837d3083c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:32:10 +0100
From: Tom <tom.primozic@gmail.com>
To: caml-list <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Subject: Polymorphic Variants
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_36420_15267369.1168979530861"
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 45AD364F.000 on discorde : j-chkmail score : X : 0/20 1 0.000 -> 1
X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45AD364F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; variants:01 variants:01 polymorphic:01 polymorphic:01 implemented:02 implemented:02 guess:04 guess:04 function:08 function:08 concrete:08 concrete:08 useful:08 useful:08 i'm:09 
X-Attachments: cset="UTF-8" cset="UTF-8" 

------=_Part_36420_15267369.1168979530861
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I have a question... I hope it will not be dismissed right away, thou I
guess most of you will find it stupid (some might however agree with me...
hopefully).

Cut the crap!

So... why actually are polymorphic variants useful? Why can't they simply be
implemented as normal, concrete (or how would you call them? ...) variants?
Doesn't the use of polymorphic variants just mess up the function type?

I'm not orthogonally against polymorphic variants, it's just that I am
looking for an alternative concept that could be used instead... Maybe
subtyped records?

- Tom

------=_Part_36420_15267369.1168979530861
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I have a question... I hope it will not be dismissed right away, thou I guess most of you will find it stupid (some might however agree with me... hopefully). <br><br>Cut the crap!<br><br>So... why actually are polymorphic variants useful? Why can&#39;t they simply be implemented as normal, concrete (or how would you call them? ...) variants? Doesn&#39;t the use of polymorphic variants just mess up the function type?
<br><br>I&#39;m not orthogonally against polymorphic variants, it&#39;s just that I am looking for an alternative concept that could be used instead... Maybe subtyped records?<br><br>- Tom<br>

------=_Part_36420_15267369.1168979530861--