Wow.  I think I follow most of that, but ATM I do wish I spoke more than
about 2 words of French.  Some of the later examples I'm a little lost
on, but I've only given it a cursory glance so far.

While this is great for the modules, it doesn't seem as though there is
a way to indicate much other than the module/functor system (although it
is possible that this is due to my shortcomings in the French
language :).  Anything on the use of partial application, lexical
scoping, HOFs, etc. as design elements?

--Jonathan

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 15:11 +0200, Philippe Narbel wrote:
> 
> > Ok.  I have a question (or set of questions) that requires the expertise
> > of the list, so here it goes:
> >
> > [...]
> 
> > Has anybody ever come up with a way of doing these things (HOFs,
> > functors, partial application, module types, parametric polymorphism) in
> > UML or any kind of modeling language?  If not, how are these things
> > usually notated in academic settings (symbolicly, not verbally)?  Is
> > there anything I can make visually that qualifies?  Google did not
> > reveal a modeling language for FPLs, so I'm lost.
> >
> 
> 
> hello,
> 
> I have been very interested in these questions for 
> some time now.  As a matter of fact, UML is not 
> very good at all to represent generic architectures...
> 
> Here in Bordeaux, I made my ML students use a special
> notation which is close to Petri nets. I introduce it in 
> my book about OCaml, but -- as Filiatre said --, it is only
> printed in french so far.
> 
> However, you can find a paper on the internet that 
> I wrote for the INRIA conference JFLA'2004 about this subject.
> It is also in french but the examples aren't, and you should
> be able to figure out how the representation works by
> looking at the figures:
> 
> http://jfla.inria.fr/2004/actes/PS/12-narbel.ps
> 
> of course, feel free to ask me any more questions.
> 
> Ph. Narbel
> 
> 
>