From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA18011; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:06:19 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA18144 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:06:18 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f9HJ6G110315; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:06:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id VAA18158; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:06:16 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:06:16 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: Chris Hecker Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] forward declaration/recursive modules patch by Frabrice? Message-ID: <20011017210616.A17973@pauillac.inria.fr> References: <200110102021.NAA19893@smtp3-cm.mail.eni.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200110102021.NAA19893@smtp3-cm.mail.eni.net>; from checker@d6.com on Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 01:21:59PM -0700 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > http://pauillac.inria.fr/caml/caml-list/1467.html > > What's the status on this (the post is from June 1999)? Since it > didn't get mentioned in any of the threads about module recursion, I'm > assuming it's not "approved of" or something? Well, I wanted to have a closer look at this patch, then got side-tracked by something else :-) But, yes, the need for cross-module recursion is still as important as it was then. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr