Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] a reckless proposal
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Miles Egan <miles@c...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] a reckless proposal
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 10:26:16PM +0200, Sven wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 11:08:17AM -0700, Miles Egan wrote:
> > This approach has, in my mind, two advantages:
> > 1. The object system becomes more generally useful.
> > 2. A confusing and non-orthogonal feature of ocaml is subsumed into
> >    another, more generally useful and flexible feature.
> But object are more heavyweight than plain record, which are, if i am not wrong,
> just named tuples.

I'm not sure about the runtime efficiency of objects, but in terms of memory
usage objects use one more field (word, I think?) of storage than a record with
the same instance members.


"We in the past evade X, where X is something which we believe to be a
lion, through the act of running." -
Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: