[
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: | John Max Skaller <skaller@o...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Modules Order |
Warp wrote: > >The problem here is that we don't know if we're using either only types or >functions from the other module. > One solution to that is to build interfaces containing types with no corresponding implementation file. Then if you use a name X for which there is an X.mli but no X.ml, you're only using types. This seems like a good policy in general, it is more robust, since there is no need to keep a duplicated ml and mli file. Ocaml's ability to process a .mli file with no corresponding .ml file doesn't appear to be documented... it works for the native code compiler, don't know about the bytecode compiler. If a type is only used locally, the requirement can be relaxed: in such cases, by specification, some functions must be used too, so the type can be included in the .ml and mli files. BTW: the big pain here is functors: using ocamlc -i to generate an expanded interface for a fuctor application is really horrible and rarely works properly (you have to edit the output to replace expanded definitions with aliases to have any hope of reading it). Is there a better way? -- John Max Skaller, mailto:skaller@ozemail.com.au snail:10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia. voice:61-2-9660-0850 ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners