Re: [Sml-implementers] Subject: Standard ML

[Andreas R. <ros...@ps...>]

Robert Harper wrote:
> 
> Please do consolidate your concerns about The Definition.  Then we can all
> compare notes, because I think others have similar concerns (some already
> raised here).

OK, here you go. Don't be shocked: the list is quite exhaustive and
contains
a lot of pedantic stuff. There are very few "major" issues.

Of course, I welcome comments on anything I have included. The list
already
contains bits from the recent discussions here. If anybody has issues
that are missing I would also like to hear about it.

During compiling this I also made a bunch of contrived test files to
see how implementations cope with some of the more obscure details of
the
Definition (i.e. those that are tedious to implement or are pretty
counter-intuitive, as noted in the list). Here is a table of the results
(I hope Netscape does not gargle it):

		SML/NJ	MosML	MLton	MLKit	Poly/ML	MLWorks	Alice
		110.0.7	2.00	010706	4.0.0	4.1.1	2.0	Oper2

abstype		-	-	+	-	-	-	+
asterisk	-	-	-	-	+	+	+
exhaustive	-	+	+	+	-	+	+
flexrecord	+	+	+	+	+	-	+
fun-case	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
id		-	-	-	+	+	+	+
nonexhaustive	+	+	-	-	+	+	-
open		-	+	-	+	+	-	-
overloading	-	+	+	+	+	-	-
scon		-	+	-	-	+	-	+
semicolon	+	+	-	-	-	+	+
sharing		-	+	+	+	+	+	-
typespec	+	-	-	-	-	+	+
undetermined	-	+	+	-	+	+	+
valrec		-	-	-	(1)	-	-	-
where-and	-	-	+	-	-	-	+
where		-	+	+	+	-	-	-
withtype	-	+	+	+	+	+	+

		(1) Internal error.

You can find the test files attached as well. Although several of
the examples are pretty pathological, the table probably indicates
that some of the features in question may be worth a revision.

	- Andreas