Re: When functional languages can be accepted by industry?

From: John Max Skaller (skaller@maxtal.com.au)
Date: Sun Apr 23 2000 - 05:20:20 MET DST

  • Next message: Chris Tilt: "Re: When functional languages can be accepted by industry?"

    Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
    >
    > On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, John Max Skaller wrote:
    >
    > >Perhaps the first, and simplest step, is to augment the notion
    > >of 'path' from a list of directories to search for a module A,
    > >to the notion that we can navigate the file system _tree_ looking
    > >for 'nested' module name such as D1.D2.B.
    >
    > The problem is that the pseudo modules D1 and D1.D2 do not have
    > signatures (or better: they do not have a fixed signature)
    > because you can always put another module into the directory.

            So give them signatures! More precisely: it may be necessary
    to _compile_ directories to get *.cmi files for them. This makes
    sense, it is analogous to compiling a text file.

            I am making a simple suggestion: allow a directory
    to work 'as if' it were a text file containing the contents
    of the directory as nested module declarations.

            You are right then, that the compilation model would
    require actually compiling the interface and module 'of'
    the directory. The main difference is how the programmer
    'edits' this module: it is by placing files in the directory
    rather than with a 'text editor'.

    -- 
    John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
    10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
    checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
    download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 25 2000 - 19:06:53 MET DST