On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Gurr, David (MED, self) wrote:

> > > My two cents worth: Please dont copy package ideas from 
> > > languages that lack functors.  And Java's package ==
> > > directory idea is far from beloved by all.  -D
> > 
> >  For me package is not a modules collection, but just
> > a way of multi-word module naming. It's not so easy to
> > give short and still adequate names to the modules, but
> > something like Db.Core.Storage looks much better then
> > Dbstorage, and Storage can still be accessed just as
> > "Storage" from modules of the same "package". Just a naming
> > way, nothing more.
> 
> And what happens when you need to abstract over a module/sub-package? -D

 No subpackages. Dots in the name does not mean any hierarchy - but just
a "name search path" hints. Just the same modules as we have now, but with
a slightly more intelligent way of name resolving.




-------------------
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