On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Keean Schupke <[email protected]> wrote: > On 21 February 2015 at 21:39, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > Choose one gets the following type I think: >> > >> > fn (fn 'a 'b -> 'c) (fn 'a 'b -> 'c) (fn 'a 'b -> 'c) -> 'c >> > >> > Inferred from the application of 'f'. >> >> That can't be right. The third argument will be a bool. Did you even >> read the message I referred to? Rhetorical question. I'm fed up for >> >> now. > > > Based on this: > >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:57 PM, William ML Leslie >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm a bit uncomfortable with what happens in the case of let-bound >> native-arity-polymorphic case: >> let f = choose_one x y z -- different arities >> in f n m >> >> How do you choose a native arity for the callsite? > > I don't see a bool argument? Then again I have no idea what the type of > choose_one is so I just guessed that it randomly picks on one x y and z that > each would have different arities inferred from their definitions.
Naw, that's the email from the 16th. I said 18th. >> Maybe someone else would like to take a turn coaxing a real proposal >> out of Keean. > > Well, its probably wasn't a very good idea in the first place. Still I think > I might implement it and see how it behaves. If you do that, then you should have a relatively easy time explaining it, by outlining the implementation. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
