Browse thread
Compiler feature - useful or not?
[
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: | Fernando Alegre <fernando@g...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Compiler feature - useful or not? |
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 11:54:30AM -0600, Edgar Friendly wrote: > > > Explicit casts, my friend. Explicit casts to convert from int to Yes. I think explicit casts should be extended to some of these cases. > permission and back. And automatically generated runtime checks to > ensure that you don't try to convert ( 37 :> permission ). 1 remains an No, no. Run-time checks are evil :-) I mean, OCaml is supposed to be a static type-safe system, so that programs that typecheck are guaranteed to run (maybe forever...) and never segfault. While exceptions are needed for I/O, no core expression should raise an exception. I think explicit casts of compile-time constants is safe (sound?), and explicit casts of a general (int :> finite type) are unsafe. I don't know whether there is a middle ground that can be both safe and useful. I guess some of the researchers on this list must know the answer (or know there is no answer, or whatever...) Thanks, Fernando