Browse thread
Re: More about modules
- Christophe Raffalli
[
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: | Christophe Raffalli <Christophe.Raffalli@u...> |
| Subject: | Re: More about modules |
Xavier Leroy wrote:
> - Inclusion of structures into larger structures (in the style of
> "open" in SML): I agree this is desirable, and we already have the
> syntax for it ("struct ... include S ... end"). It requires a little
> more implementation work than exception renaming, so I'll probably do
> it for 3.01.
> Opinions?
>
> - Xavier Leroy
I really agree: the include for structure you proposed is needed.
But include Module with .... Is also really needed. Here is an example
(not reallistic):
module type Set =
sig
type elt
end
module type Morphisme =
sig
module E : Set
module F : Set
type elt = E.elt -> F.elt
end
module type Endomorphisme
sig
include Morphisme with module E = F
end
I know you can allways find another way of writing. But this is much
clearer with the "include .. with" !
--
Christophe Raffalli
Université de Savoie
Batiment Le Chablais, bureau 21
73376 Le Bourget-du-Lac Cedex
tél: (33) 4 79 75 81 03
fax: (33) 4 79 75 87 42
mail: Christophe.Raffalli@univ-savoie.fr
www: http://www.lama.univ-savoie.fr/~RAFFALLI