* Jeremy Bem:

> To support my research, I've developed an implementation ("Llama Light") of
> the core Caml language. Modules, objects, labels etc are not supported
> (except for file-level modules). The system strongly resembles OCaml,
> however the completely rewritten typechecker is not only much smaller in
> terms of lines-of-code; it has a genuinely simpler design owing especially
> to the lack of first-class modules.

How do you deal with strings (are they mutable?) and polymorphic
equality (is it type-safe?)?