[
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: | skaller <skaller@u...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCAML Downcasting? |
On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 23:15, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote: > Cláudio Valente <cvalente@co.sapo.pt> writes: > I meant exhaustive tests, not heuristics for easy cases where the > divisor is constant. It is of course possible to it entirely statically right now in Ocaml by using an abstract type for a non-zero int. Not as good as CDuce's interval arithmetic because you have to handle the 0 in the int-> nonzero_int conversion, but still afterwards you can divide without an exception. Some functions, eg multiplication, preserve non-zeroness, so in many cases you can use static typing to avoid gratuitous checks for zero. As you may have noted in my Felix example -- exceptions are just too powerful: I forgot to catch the exception. I fixed my modulus function too .. but no doubt I have missed others. Perhaps static checking would make programming harder -- but nothing is harder than exhaustively testing a complex program. -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- 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