Browse thread
[Caml-list] camlimages vs. labltk
[
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: | Chris Hecker <checker@d...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] naming conflicts (was: camlimages vs. labltk) |
>First example: >Second example (somewhat artificial): Right, both of those jibe with what I thought you were saying. I don't know enough to understand your functor solution, but -pack could also be used to solve both of these problems, if it did a real partial-link. In other words, if I -pack B and A, and B uses a module A, then B's imports should be resolved to the A that it got packed with. I don't know if this is simpler or more complex than your functor solution, but this one at least could still be handled by current partial linking tools (which is what -pack uses right now). In fact, this might already happen with pack, since you can -pack modules that refer to other modules, and since they're now in a super-module, the semantics are that they should still refer to the submodules at the same scope. So, this should already work with -pack, no? If so, then the cmo/cma partial linking thing is the only thing wrong with -pack from both a package and namespace manager perspective. Or am I missing something obvious? Chris ------------------- 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