[plt-scheme] Standard ML in PLT Scheme

From: Chongkai Zhu (czhu at cs.utah.edu)
Date: Thu Dec 20 15:11:12 EST 2007

Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> Are the denotations of 1 the same in ML as in Scheme? How about closures?
> Conjecture: It looks like you have created an unsound hybrid language. 
> I.e., unsound from the perspective of ML; its invariants can be 
> undermined now.

My conjecture is that if type-inference (which includes type checking) 
of haMLet is used, you can't violate an ML invariant in pure ML: you 
have to do it in Scheme.

> -- Matthias

Posted on the users mailing list.