From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q1EAO7d2017183
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:24:07 +0100
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AucDAO41Ok+7SSC7nGdsb2JhbABDgw2CA6sMIgEBAQEBCAsJCRQngXIBAQQBI1YFCwsYAgImAgIgDQEpBogPp26SHYEvinIBAgECBQMEBwoEBxoDAwECAoN1AQiCYIEWBJsMX4xD
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,416,1325458800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="144153734"
Received: from mta115.f1.k8.com.br ([187.73.32.187])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2012 11:24:01 +0100
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtpz.f1.k8.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461846009E;
	Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:23:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at k8.com.br
Received: from smtpz.f1.k8.com.br ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (mta115.f1.k8.com.br [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with LMTP id Ud-o8iGmcL-U; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:23:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.7.5.14] (fosforo.f2.k8.com.br [200.150.156.10])
	by smtpz.f1.k8.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1428460095;
	Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:23:59 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1329215040.13129.3.camel@andre>
From: Andre Nathan <andre@digirati.com.br>
To: Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>
Cc: Arnaud Spiwack <aspiwack@lix.polytechnique.fr>, caml-list@inria.fr
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:24:00 -0200
In-Reply-To: <CAPFanBFtLh7rkmUdv4iXzSsMdMckr0FX_uKqenDAsX53oOwZiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4F399DD5.3000507@digirati.com.br>
	 <CAMoPVjf2RnHHh=piQEh3dgbBUarQhx_EBT=Ni3EenosPpn0Dfw@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1329213575.13129.0.camel@andre>
	 <CAPFanBFtLh7rkmUdv4iXzSsMdMckr0FX_uKqenDAsX53oOwZiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] What am I reinventing here?

On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 11:09 +0100, Gabriel Scherer wrote:
> Here is an attempt at a functor translation. Note that's it's mostly a
> glorified way to do exactly the same thing. Passing a module or a
> record of operation is not very different; yet a module can carry
> types so you don't have to parametrize your operations explicitly.

Thank you Gabriel.

> module Make (O : OPS) = struct
>   let foo = O.bar_of_foo
>   let bar = O.foo_of_bar
> end

Would it be correct to say that it isn't possible to specify a signature
S for the output module like

module Make (O : OPS) : S = struct
  ...
end

that would still make pattern-matching outside of the module possible?

Thanks,
Andre