On 26 October 2011 21:07, John Carr <[email protected]> wrote:
> Can I rewrite this function to have the type I requested
> instead of failing type checking?

Yes: see "How to write a function with polymorphic arguments?" in the Caml FAQ:

http://caml.inria.fr/resources/doc/faq/core.en.html#polymorphic-arguments

-- 
Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs

Reply via email to