Stephan Houben wrote:
>These all seem things the interpreter does now. In the crudest set-up,
>I would simply send string to the interpreter. However, a better
>approach might be to actually send the AST to the interpreter.

>I also need to get the type information. A crude approach would be again
>to ask the interpreter to evaluate something like module M = Blah, 
>and look at the result. again, I suppose a better approach would be
>to get the data structure inside the compiler back.

Have you looked at Camlp4?  It allows users to extend/redefine the
concrete syntax, and IIRC it has some code like what you are looking
for above to facilitate this.

Ruchira Datta
datta@math.berkeley.edu