On Fri, 19 May 2006, Jon Harrop wrote:

> Agreed. Should OCaml's successor have extensible arrays with 64-bit lengths
> and strings as char arrays?

Why not just run Ocaml as a 64-bit app on a 64-bit OS?

We I designing a language today, I'd have 63-bit array lengths- of course, 
I'd do it by not bothering to support 32-bit systems...

As for strings, I'd be inclined to make them immutable- the correct way to 
manipulate strings is with regular expressions.  But I'm widely 
acknowledged to be an extremist.

Brian