On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 09:20:18AM -0800, Chris Hecker wrote:
> I disagree about this.  It's really about type safety and strong
> typing.  You can catch a lot of errors if you can type the shape of
> the array (especially in numerical code).  Not only can you get rid
> of assert(size(array)==4) in every numerical function, but you can
> also safely get rid of runtime bounds checks in some cases (as Xi's
> work shows).  But, ignoring efficiency, I think the added type safety
> is a win.

You might want to check out fISH then. It is very Caml-ish.
http://www-staff.mcs.uts.edu.au/~cbj/FISh/
Dependent ML, Cayenne, and Coq may also be of interest to you.

Cheers,
Bill
-- 
<pan2:#math> when i was a kid i behaved like a polynomial
--