]> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:21:47 +0900 Jacques Garrigue wrote: > As specified in the reference manual, the combination of .ml and .mli > is expected to mean: > module type Sig_mod1 = sig <mod1.mli> end > module Struct_mod1 = struct <mod1.ml> end > module Mod1 : Sig_mod1 = Struct_mod1 Let's be a bit fussy... The manual says : << module Mod1: sig <mod1.mli> end = struct <mod1.ml> end >> Hopefully, because the first translation would export hidden parts of Mod1 via Struct_mod1. But I think that giving a name to the signature of Mod1 (Sig_mod1) could be useful : << module type MOD1 : sig <mod1.mli> end module Mod1 : MOD1 = struct <mod1.ml> end >> Especially when hand-packing some modules : "ocamlc -pack" checks the packed cmo against an optional interface file, but the latter is rather boring to write, since one has to copy&paste the content of each packed interface. If the module types were given a name, one could just write << module Mod1: MOD1 ... >> damien PS: I tried "module Mod1: Sig_mod1", of course it doesn't work :-( ------------------- 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