Gabriel Scherer
Gabriel Scherer
Over at https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/13471#issuecomment-2383491990, @stedolan discussed the need for something in the spirit of this RFC: > There are three reasonable places to specify they keyword set / language edition in...
I didn't look at the proposal until today. A few comments. I certainly agree with Didier that it is odd/unpleasant to classify polymorphic fields as impure. Taking a step back,...
I prefer "safe" over "pure" because while users understand that there are many distinct notions of "safety" (so they will wait to see which one you mean before assuming a...
I like @ivg's proposal.
We could use `[@@leaking 'a]` as a negative form. (Note: another syntactic approach would be to attach attributes to occurrences of types within the declaration, `'a[@generalize] -> 'b[@leaking] -> 'b...
(I don't really agree that we should not provide a negative statement. When there are two options, I think that we should always have a syntax for both, even if...
We discussed this briefly again, and a central question seems to be how the proposed feature would interact with effect typing. @lpw25 should write an RFC on effect typing (when...
cc @goldfirere: I wonder if you would be interested in co-shepherding this RFC.
Not something I am planning to implement in the near future (I personally think that `cd .. ; ocamlbuild ...` is good enough), but pull requests are welcome. If we...
> Are there any reasons not to do this? To my knowledge, no one has done the work of submitting the patch upstream (here) yet, and (hopefully) explaining what it...