Browse thread
[Caml-list] Semantics of physical equality
[
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: | 2004-02-28 (09:40) |
From: | sejourne kevin <sejourne_kevin@y...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Semantics of physical equality |
--- Michal Moskal <malekith@pld-linux.org> a écrit : > On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 10:32:29PM +0100, Basile > STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 02:29:50PM -0600, Kevin S. > Millikin wrote: > > > I'm trying to figure out what I can rely on > about physical equality. > > > I've checked the OCaml manual but can't seem to > find what I want to > > > know. > > > > > > Presume > > > > > > # type t = V0 | V1 of int;; > > > type t = V0 | V1 of int > > > > > > # V0 == V0;; > > > - : bool = true > > > > > > V0's are the same. Is this guaranteed? > > > > Yes. > > Is it? > > "On non-mutable structures, the behavior of (==) is > implementation-dependent;" [1] > > [1] > http://caml.inria.fr/ocaml/htmlman/libref/Pervasives.html Ho! A definition for mutable structures look ambiguous to me: type test = { mutable a:int; b:int };; let r = {a=0;b=2};; let x = r and y = r in assert((x.a==y.a)&&(x.b==y.b)&&(x==y)) ;; Does this always ok ? Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.benefits.yahoo.com/ Dialoguez en direct avec vos amis grâce à Yahoo! Messenger !Téléchargez Yahoo! Messenger sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------- 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