Browse thread
Parameterized signatures needed ?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@i...> |
| Subject: | Re: Parameterized signatures needed ? |
> In view of the
> solutions which exist at the level of expressions, one may suggest
> extending O'Caml with
>
> * either explicit sub-signature constraints, e.g.
>
> module d(X:sig
> module type B < sig type t end
> module F(a:A) : sig
> module b:B
> module c:C with type t = b.t
> end
> end) : ...
It looks like this would fit quite naturally within the OCaml module
system. After all, the module language is explicitely typed, has
subtyping and a form of parametric polymorphism; bounded polymorphism
is the next step. (I haven't checked the details, though.)
> * or row variables in signatures, although I am not sure which form
> this would take.
This looks less natural to me. A very limited form of "row
polymorphism" can already be expressed with module type parameters and
sub-structures, as in:
module d(X:sig
module type X
module F(a:A) : sig
module b: sig type t module M: X end
module c:C with type t = b.t
end
end) : ...
but it's very limited and not really practical.
- Xavier Leroy