Dario Teixeira a écrit :
> A simple nonsensical example that illustrates the problem is listed below; the
> type-checking error occurs in function "step1", where the optional parameter "story"
> is used as an object of type "< title:string; .. >".  In function "step3", this
> parameter "story" is actually instantiated with objects of type "< title:string >"
> and "< title:string; count:int >".

As said elsewhere, this is because you are trying to do polymorphic
recursion. Standard tricks work here:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
type steps = {
  step1 : 'a. ?story:(<title : string; ..> as 'a) -> unit -> bool;
  step2 : string -> bool;
  step3 : 'a. story:(<title : string; count : int; ..> as 'a) -> bool
}

let rec steps = {

  step1 =
    begin fun ?story () ->
      match story with
        | Some s -> steps.step2 s#title
        | None -> steps.step2 "title1"
    end;

  step2 =
    begin fun title ->
      let story = object
        method title = title
        method count = 0
      end in
      steps.step3 story
    end;

  step3 =
    begin fun ~story ->
      match story#count with
        | 0 ->
	    steps.step1 ~story ()
        | 1 ->
	    let story = object
              method title = "title2"
            end in
            steps.step1 ~story ()
        | _ ->
	    true
    end
}

let step1 = steps.step1
let step2 = steps.step2
let step3 = steps.step3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

With OCaml 3.12, I guess this should be feasible without using the
intermediate "steps" record.


Cheers,

-- 
Stéphane