| View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] |
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
| 0005607 | OCaml | Caml web site | public | 2012-05-06 12:57 | 2012-09-21 14:15 |
|
| Reporter | gasche | |
| Assigned To | gasche | |
| Priority | normal | Severity | text | Reproducibility | N/A |
| Status | acknowledged | Resolution | open | |
| Platform | | OS | | OS Version | |
| Product Version | | |
| Target Version | 4.01.0+dev | Fixed in Version | | |
|
| Summary | 0005607: FAQ suggestion: explain the interaction between (relaxed) value restriction and variance annotations |
| Description | Users, even familiar with the language, mostly do not not about variance annotations, and in particular their interaction with the relaxed value restriction. The problem they observe is that expressions at an abstract type representing a polymorphic data structure do not get generalized as expected.
I think that would be a good addition in the FAQ, in the spirit of "A function obtained through partial application is not polymorphic enough". |
| Additional Information | This problem has been discussed twice recently:
- on the caml-list
https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/arc/caml-list/2012-05/msg00032.html [^]
- on reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/ocaml/comments/t8g2e/pdf_relaxing_the_value_restriction_by_jacques/c4kf68s [^]
My reddit message might be a good basis for a FAQ answer; I hope to receive additional feedback on which wording would be best. |
| Tags | No tags attached. |
|
| Attached Files | |
|
Relationships 
Relationships 