[
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: | 2003-12-05 (12:56) |
From: | Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@k...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] coercing to a #-type |
From: Henri Dubois-Ferriere <henridf@lcavsun1.epfl.ch> > can coercing an object to a #-type ever change the type of the object? > > [i tried to come up with some instance where this would happen, but could > not, and on thinking about it i would guess that since a #-type is 'open', > it makes no sense to coerce to such a type.] What do you mean by "coercing"? If you mean (o :> #a), then indeed it is pointless, as it is just equivalent to (o : #a) (no subtyping is introduced). > A somewhat related question: > > class a = object method bla = 1 end > are the types > > #a > > and > > < bla : int; ..> > > equivalent? (in the sense that using on instead of the other will > always give identical results) Indeed they are equivalent. #a is just a convenience to make printed types more readable. Jacques Garrigue ------------------- 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