Re: [Caml-list] Constructors are not functions

2009-10-06 Thread Jim Farrand
the revised syntax, so this is definitely possible. Regards, Jim -- Jim Farrand E-Mail/Jabber/Google-Talk/MSN: jim.farr...@gmail.com Phone number changed Jun 2009: Now ends 996 (Ask for the rest, delete the old one!) ___ Caml-list mailing list

Re: [Caml-list] Typeclasses in OCaml (Was: Haskell vs OCaml)

2008-08-14 Thread Jim Farrand
2008/8/14 Peng Zang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: (=) : 'a - 'a - bool But instead: (=) : (#equatable as 'a) - 'a - bool where class type equatable = object method equals : 'self - bool end This gives all the advantages of static typing and type inference and prevents stupid errors and

Re: [Caml-list] Value shadowing

2008-08-13 Thread Jim Farrand
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:15:53 -0700 Brighten Godfrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also find that style useful. Sometimes the type changes, but I can recall useful cases where the type doesn't change, e.g., a sequence of various operations on a list. Mock-up: let lst =