<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<!DOCTYPE message PUBLIC
  "-//MLarc//DTD MLarc output files//EN"
  "../../mlarc.dtd"[
  <!ATTLIST message
    listname CDATA #REQUIRED
    title CDATA #REQUIRED
  >
]>

  <?xml-stylesheet href="../../mlarc.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>


<message 
  url="2009/01/f1aad22c4a589642a3bb869a498b8209"
  from="David Allsopp &lt;dra-news@m...&gt;"
  author="David Allsopp"
  date="2009-01-14T15:39:56"
  subject="RE: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?"
  prev="2009/01/a1ade591c77a79c5499179f8e61baf52"
  next="2009/01/bd2154c070fbbf0db327cfe1ac2f06b8"
  prev-in-thread="2009/01/a1ade591c77a79c5499179f8e61baf52"
  next-in-thread="2009/01/6fa2751eaac22525f374afc56dd431c5"
  prev-thread="2009/01/f07eb010cca2eff83e4c7a391c1beec7"
  next-thread="2009/01/6cf79b75301fab6a2690970d5f9afce6"
  root="../../"
  period="month"
  listname="caml-list"
  title="Archives of the Caml mailing list">

<thread subject="What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/d009a32338fe2358180636ec38f25ff7"
  from="Radzevich Belevich &lt;radzevich.belevich@g...&gt;"
  author="Radzevich Belevich"
  date="2009-01-14T09:18:34"
  subject="What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/4b5af49a7cba83100640b515610091d8"
  from="David Allsopp &lt;dra-news@m...&gt;"
  author="David Allsopp"
  date="2009-01-14T09:36:00"
  subject="RE: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/3ecccd2434146d19ca1d3421567a5687"
  from="Richard Jones &lt;rich@a...&gt;"
  author="Richard Jones"
  date="2009-01-14T09:51:49"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/5f1b07f9372962c4e6c1289b87b07329"
  from="Sylvain Le Gall &lt;sylvain@l...&gt;"
  author="Sylvain Le Gall"
  date="2009-01-14T13:35:50"
  subject="Re: What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/eaa7a5e430cc498ebaa24cfa72dfa40c"
  from="Dawid Toton &lt;d0@w...&gt;"
  author="Dawid Toton"
  date="2009-01-14T13:44:49"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/a1ade591c77a79c5499179f8e61baf52"
  from="Martin Jambon &lt;martin.jambon@e...&gt;"
  author="Martin Jambon"
  date="2009-01-14T15:39:17"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/f1aad22c4a589642a3bb869a498b8209"
  from="David Allsopp &lt;dra-news@m...&gt;"
  author="David Allsopp"
  date="2009-01-14T15:39:56"
  subject="RE: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/6fa2751eaac22525f374afc56dd431c5"
  from="Jacques Garrigue &lt;garrigue@m...&gt;"
  author="Jacques Garrigue"
  date="2009-01-15T12:13:36"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/a92fb204b44d257214f723b6267be86d"
  from="Benedikt Grundmann &lt;benedikt.grundmann@g...&gt;"
  author="Benedikt Grundmann"
  date="2009-01-15T12:46:16"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/1b8eb3b52088e8fffff776a62cc75175"
  from="Oliver Bandel &lt;oliver@f...&gt;"
  author="Oliver Bandel"
  date="2009-01-15T22:20:50"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/7312253b25c1ecc3531c6e6f9cce03cc"
  from="Kuba Ober &lt;ober.14@o...&gt;"
  author="Kuba Ober"
  date="2009-01-16T14:56:05"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
</msg>
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/5e1743ee64b2e8d98a2d49c2322433a3"
  from="David Allsopp &lt;dra-news@m...&gt;"
  author="David Allsopp"
  date="2009-01-15T12:51:34"
  subject="RE: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/91a2652f1e0d99973e3fe36b3b63f44a"
  from="Stefan Monnier &lt;monnier@i...&gt;"
  author="Stefan Monnier"
  date="2009-01-15T21:08:19"
  subject="Re: What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
</msg>
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/14d8d8d728ebd37e4a9f9ddac58fed93"
  from="Jérémie Dimino &lt;jeremie@d...&gt;"
  author="Jérémie Dimino"
  date="2009-01-14T16:07:38"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/22c25b4e5ea354938c7d5035de6cc89a"
  from="Dario Teixeira &lt;darioteixeira@y...&gt;"
  author="Dario Teixeira"
  date="2009-01-14T17:29:05"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/f679aa40d312c7084ed5422741c0cd24"
  from="Richard Jones &lt;rich@a...&gt;"
  author="Richard Jones"
  date="2009-01-15T17:50:54"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
</msg>
<msg 
  url="2009/01/9bd9cb12dcbf96b8c27512b55051256b"
  from="Richard Jones &lt;rich@a...&gt;"
  author="Richard Jones"
  date="2009-01-15T17:46:43"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/ac0bd86b327fabed4e03a7bfa07c588d"
  from="Xavier Leroy &lt;Xavier.Leroy@i...&gt;"
  author="Xavier Leroy"
  date="2009-01-18T16:34:24"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
<msg 
  url="2009/01/5308b83c36d2f5cea5ee6ea4ec3329d0"
  from="Richard Jones &lt;rich@a...&gt;"
  author="Richard Jones"
  date="2009-01-18T18:02:54"
  subject="Re: [Caml-list] What is a future of ocaml?">
</msg>
</msg>
</msg>
</msg>
</msg>
</thread>

<contents>
Dawid Toton wrote:
&gt; Could anybody explain why it's impossible to have type classes in OCaml?

I don't think it's impossible - but I believe that if you introduce type
classes then you "damage" Hindley-Milner type inference and you can no
longer derive a principal typing for an arbitrary ML expression without
resorting to type annotations. Whether this is a problem or not is a matter
of taste - but it does make the language harder to call "ML" if you lose one
of its central features! That said, there are of course two big features
(objects and polymorphic variants) in OCaml already which do require
annotations.


David

</contents>

</message>

