Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: brogoff@s...
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Gregory Morrisett wrote:
> MLTON avoids these issues by specializing polymorphic code at
> all of its uses so that it becomes monomorphic (not unlike C++), 
> at the price of separate compilation.

And, as I think you're implying, polymorphic recursion. 

In Okasaki's PFDS book, he describes the techniques you'd use to convert 
non-uniform types to uniform ones and rewriting the functions. Has anyone 
played with the idea of automating these transformations, so that a MLTON like 
monomorphizing compiler could work for a language with non uniform recursion? 

No, I'm not suggesting that for OCaml. I agree that the OCaml implementation is 
at some sweet spot where it isn't too complex, is very efficient, compiles 
quickly, etc. 

-- Brian


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners