Browse thread
[Caml-list] illegal permutation of structure fields?
-
Markus Mottl
-
Xavier Leroy
- Andreas Rossberg
- Markus Mottl
- John Max Skaller
-
Xavier Leroy
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | John Max Skaller <skaller@m...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] illegal permutation of structure fields? |
Xavier Leroy wrote: > > > I've just found out to my surprise that the following does not work: [] > > This yields the following error: > > Illegal permutation of structure fields > > > > Why is this illegal? Wouldn't it be very straightforward to normalize > > the signatures (e.g. sort elements by name) before matching them? > > That's more or less what old versions of OCaml did, but it's > incorrect. The reason is that a module signature determine the layout > of the corresponding structure: if [] I don't understand this explanation. Markus suggested _normalising_ the order by name. That is, the 'actual' storage order of elements is determined by their names, not by the order of writing. -- John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au 10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850 New generation programming language Felix http://felix.sourceforge.net Literate Programming tool Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr