Sorry,
foo = add
--
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
As written, the behavior of the types might not be what you expect, since
addition of two 16 bit ints may result in an int that requires 17 bits.
When using phantom types, you need to be especially careful that the types
mean what you think they mean.
On Sep 26, 2011 8:13 AM, Denis Berthod
Thanks to all for your answers.
Phantom types could be a solution but we must declare a new type for
each possible size, which is cumbersome / annoying.
Moreover, since i'm writing a DSL, the fact that they do not require a
modification to the existing type system is not really an
Phantom types could be a solution but we must declare a new type for
each possible size, which is cumbersome / annoying.
If you define the type system yourself, you can easily add a family of
type constants `sizen` (with `n` an integer literal) to the default
environment of the type checker.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 01:42:51PM +0200, Jocelyn Sérot wrote:
Hello,
I've recently come across a problem while writing a domain specific
language for hardware synthesis
(http://wwwlasmea.univ-bpclermont.fr/Personnel/Jocelyn.Serot/caph.html
[...]
Very interesting.
I also once thought
