Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> Romain Bardou wrote:
>> Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
>>> Romain Bardou wrote:
>>>> Hello, dear Caml-list,
>>>>
>>>> I have a file ast.mli. It has no .ml implementation as it contains only
>>>> type definitions.
>>>
>>> Then you should name that file ast.ml. Last time I tested (more than a
>>> year ago) n ast.ml file without corresponding ast.mli file is handled as
>>> if ast.mli was the output of ocamlc -i ast.ml.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>
>> Yes, this seems to be the easiest way. It's too bad that this implies
>> having a .cmo to link against just for some type definitions, though.
> 
> 
> Why is that bad?  The *.cm[oi] files are the only ones containing the
> processed type & module information, and we obviously don't want ocamlc
> to reparse ast.mli each time it is needed.

Indeed, but a .cmi would be enough :)

Cheers,

-- 
Romain Bardou