From: Tony Edgin <edgin@slingshot.co.nz>

> Recently, there was a thread which talked about how difficult module 
> dependencies were to resolve for linking in Ocaml.  I'm guessing this is 
> because of cycles in the dependency graph.
> 
> My thought is that maybe Ocaml shouldn't allow this to happen.  Wouldn't 
> cyclical module dependencies be a symptom of bad design?

Bingo. Ocaml does not allow it. It just happens that you can cheat the
compiler into accepting two different acyclic dependency graphs: one
for the types (compilation order of the .mli's) and one for the values
(compilation order of the .ml's). This was never intended, but there
is no specific reason to go to great length to defeat that trick, as
it is still safe.

At least that's my take on the question.

> If a cyclic dependency occurs I can think of two ways of removing.  

Indeed, this is the reasonable approach.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacques Garrigue      Kyoto University     garrigue at kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp
		<A HREF=http://wwwfun.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~garrigue/>JG</A>

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