[MLton] (possible) front-end bug
Matthew Fluet
fluet@cs.cornell.edu
Tue, 20 Jan 2004 21:08:04 -0500 (EST)
> I suspect that SML/NJ is correct; a datatype in a signature would be an
> (implicit) definitional specification, wouldn't it?
But that can't be quite right either. I do want to be able to say:
signature T =
sig
structure Y : S where type t = Z.t
and type u = Z.u
end
to indicate that any structure matching T will have a substructure Y that
is essentially equal to Z.
I was playing with compiling some of the SML/NJ libraries with MLton and
I'm translating
signature T =
sig
structure Y : S = Z
end
to the above; the "bug" was a cut-and-paste-and-edit error that ended up
as the code which MLton accepted but SML/NJ did not.