Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Alain Frisch <frisch@c...>
Subject: RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
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


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

  Alain Frisch