From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E97A8BC6B
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Thu,  1 Nov 2007 11:53:25 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAHJMKUfDuhNCnmdsb2JhbACOXwEBAQEHBAYHChg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,357,1188770400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="5346256"
Received: from mail22.bluewin.ch ([195.186.19.66])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2007 11:53:25 +0100
Received: from [192.168.1.58] (85.2.1.129) by mail22.bluewin.ch (Bluewin 7.3.121)
        id 471B461B0028502E for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:53:24 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <7BE597C9-3EF8-4DF4-946F-826FF312A256@erratique.ch>
References: <7BE597C9-3EF8-4DF4-946F-826FF312A256@erratique.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <12B29D95-87FB-43F1-A26F-6128EB41FDF5@erratique.ch>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Working on dependent projects with ocamlbuild
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 11:53:44 +0100
To: caml-list caml-list <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-Spam: no; 0.00; bunzli:01 buenzli:01 mli:01 val:01 mli:01 cmo:01 cmo:01 cmi:01 cmi:01 abstraction:01 signatures:01 compilers:01 caml-list:01 cma:01 cma:01 

Hello,

I'm now trying to do something a little bit more complex but fail to  
solve it in the simple way I mentionned (maybe it is not possible). I  
still have the same setup of two independent projects each depending  
on a base project.

base/src
p1/src
p2/src

The base project is structured as follows :

base/src/a.ml
base/src/b.ml
base/src/base.ml
base/src/base.mli

with base.ml as follows

module A = A
module B = B
val ...

The idea is that b.ml can access things in a.ml that users of the  
base project should not access. What I used to do is to  
appropriatlely constrain the signatures of A and B in base.mli and  
then create in a directory :

dest/base.cma (containing a.cmo b.cmo base.cmo)
dest/base.cmi
dest/base.mli

Thus forcing access to A and B via the constrained signature Base.A  
and Base.B.

But if I use the approach mentionned in my initial posting users of  
base will see the unconstrained a.cmi and b.cmi. Is there a way that  
allows me to use this approach while maintaining the abstraction I  
get with cma's ? Even if it means plugins in p1 and p2 ? I have the  
impression that the response is negative because even if I try to  
build a .cma with a mllib the build directory with have all .cmi and  
the compilers will look at them.

Thanks for your answers,

Daniel