Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included

[David Teller <David.Teller@univ-orleans.fr>]

     Dear list,

 As you know, we've been working for several months of OCaml Batteries
Included. Early in the development, it appeared to us that, with the
large number of modules involved, we would need a hierarchy of modules.

 For instance, for the moment, we have a module [System] containing
among other submodules [IO] (definition of i/o operations), [File]
(definition of operations on files), [Sys] (the usual OCaml [Sys]
module, soon to be expanded), etc.  Therefore, before one may open and
manipulate files, one has to do

 open System.IO;;
 open System.File;;

or, with the syntax extension we developed to alleviate this,

 open System, IO, File

The syntax extension does a few other things which we're not going to
detail here -- for one thing, it allows local opening of modules.


Now, we've decided that our current hierarchy is perhaps somewhat clumsy
and that it may benefit from some reworking. Before we proceed, we'd
like some feedback from the community. For this purpose, I have posted a
tree of the current hierarchy on my blog [1]. The documentation is
available online, as usual [2]

Thank you for your feedback,
 For the Batteries Pack,
   David


[1]
http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/batteries-hierarchy/ 
[2]
http://batteries.forge.ocamlcore.org/doc.preview/batteries-alpha2/doc/batteries/html/api/index.html 
-- 
David Teller-Rajchenbach
 Security of Distributed Systems
  http://www.univ-orleans.fr/lifo/Members/David.Teller
 Angry researcher: French Universities need reforms, but the LRU act brings liquidations.