On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Claudio Russo wrote:

> For the record, your simplification based on identity of signature
> identifiers
> is probably ok in practice, but it does
> rule out some examples that involve package types with free type
> variables. 

Right. Would it break something to allow named module type with
explicit arguments:

module type 'a ARRAY = sig
   type array
   val init: 'a -> array
   val sub: array -> int -> 'a
   val update : array -> int -> 'a -> array
end

?

Then the unification between < (a1,...,ap) S > and < (b1,...,bq) T >
is solved by equating S = T (syntactically), p=q  and unifying
a1=b1,...,ap=bp.


-- 
  Alain Frisch