Poly/ML March 2012

polyml@lists.polyml.org

3 participants
4 discussions

Inspecting structures
by ramana.kumar＠gmail.com 27 Jan '16

27 Jan '16

Is there a way to look at the contents (i.e. signature) of a structure without opening it? (I suppose you could just open it then call a lot of PolyML.Compiler.forgetXXX, but that's quite tedious) Also, is it possible to retrieve the long path of an identifier in scope? Something that will, for example, take the rev in scope and say that it came from List. Finally, what about searching for an identifier that would come into scope if you opened some structures?

3 5

[Fwd: Re: [polyml] Building Poly/ML on MacOS X 10.6]
by rda＠lemma-one.com 29 Dec '14

29 Dec '14

I wrote: > I am completely baffled. I thought I hada solved all my problems on > MacOS X > 10.6 and was just tidying up, when I had to recompile a 32 bit > version of > Poly/ML to test a tidied up make file. This failed because > PolyML.Compiler.printTypesWithStructureName no longer exists. The same > problem happened when i rebuild a 64 bit version. What has happened? but it was a false alarm: my make file was wrong for other reasons and the absence of PolyML.Compiler.printTypesWithStructureName was not relevant. No doubt there are good reasons why this variable has been withdrawn. Regards, Rob.

3 6

Lifespan of pointers to callback functions passed via C FFI
by phil.clayton＠lineone.net 13 Aug '12

13 Aug '12

I have been assuming that the pointer back to an ML function passed to a foreign C function will still be valid after the C function has returned, so the callback can occur sometime later (from a different C function). Is that a valid assumption? I made this assumption based on some tests in which one such callback pointer remained valid for the life of the application. It would be nice to know I wasn't just being (un)lucky! Phil

2 5

Poly/ML and SML/NJ warn inconsistently about using op for an infix constructor
by phil.clayton＠lineone.net 04 Apr '12

04 Apr '12

For example, given infix & datatype t = & Poly/ML (5.4) reports: Warning-(&) has infix status but was not preceded by op. So Poly/ML seems to prefer the use of 'op' in a datatype declaration. However, if 'op' is present, i.e. datatype t = op & SML/NJ (110.73) reports: stdIn:2.14-2.16 Warning: unnecessary `op' Generally, it is a good principle to avoid warnings but, in this particular respect, that isn't possible for code that is shared between Poly/ML and SML/NJ. Note that MLton (20100608) doesn't warn either way. Does the Standard provide any guidance about the use of op here? Can anything be done to align the warnings from Poly/ML and SML/NJ in this respect? Thanks, Phil

4 9

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Poly/ML March 2012