Browse thread
[Caml-list] Why must types be always defined at the top level?
[
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: | Markus Mottl <markus@o...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Why must types be always defined at the top level? |
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Richard Jones wrote:
> The subject says it all really. Why do types need to be defined at
> the top level of a module? Why isn't it possible to define them in
> some nested scope?
But it is (using local modules):
let f () =
let module M = struct
type t = Foo
end in
M.Foo = M.Foo
Note that you cannot return values such that the module name escapes
its scope.
Regards,
Markus
--
Markus Mottl http://www.oefai.at/~markus markus@oefai.at
-------------------
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