Please forgive me if I make some mistakes in interpreting your
message.  My French is not good at all.

I believe the message was talking about the merging of
modules/functors and objects, and how there is a lot of redundancy in
O'Caml already, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

My feeling about modules and objects is not that they should be in any
way unified--they do indeed serve different roles.  What I *would*
like to see is a bit better support when the two things are used
together.  The recent thread about how to write the functor such that
it takes in a module with a class in it and uses that class is a good
example of a rough spot--you can manipulate the type part of a class
like it is a type.  You can wrap the "new blah" construct in an actual
function.  But you cannot truly express in a functor that "module F (A
: MT_Having_Class_Cl) : MT_Having_Other_Class_Cl with class cl = A.cl"

It is this sort of difficulty that can scare a user of objects away
from using functors, even when functors do suit their needs admirably.
 I'd also suggest that some advanced examples of modules and functors
sans objects might be nice to have in the manual--but that's really
something that can be done by the community (and outside the manual.)

John.

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