Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] zero-arity constructor
[
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: | 2010-11-28 (07:39) |
From: | Martin Jambon <martin.jambon@e...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] zero-arity constructor |
On 11/27/10 04:23, Julia Lawall wrote: > In my case, I originally thought that the constructor should take an > argument, then changed my mind. I would have hoped that OCaml would have > found the inconsistency. That's what static typing is for. Thus, I > find the change quite disappointing. I also find the change uninspired. > Perhaps it would have been nicer to have an option to allow the behavior > that is useful in the camlp4 case, rather than making it the default. Could the warning be turned on by default in the next OCaml release, please? Martin