From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE 
	autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5D9BC69
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 04:56:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.1])
	by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l7O2uF1B021071
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 04:56:17 +0200
Received: from localhost (orion [130.54.16.5])
	by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7O2uD5H016907;
	Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:56:14 +0900 (JST)
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:56:08 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20070824.115608.24601967.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
To: bhurt@spnz.org
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Stupid question re:modules
From: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708232023160.12703@localhost>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708232023160.12703@localhost>
X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46CE48CF.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; foo:01 sig:01 val:01 foo:01 sig:01 val:01 baz:01 baz:01 overwrite:01 struct:01 struct:01 signatures:01 signatures:01 caml-list:01 define:02 

From: Brian Hurt <bhurt@spnz.org>
> I should just know this.  So let's say I have two module types defined:
> 
> module type Foo = sig
>  	type 'a t
>  	val foo : 'a -> 'a t
> end;;
> 
> module type Bar = sig
>  	type 'a t
>  	val bar : 'a -> 'a t
> end;;
> 
> Now, I want to define a module that is both a Foo and a Bar without 
> cutting and pasting the module definitions around.  I've been trying to 
> do:
> 
> module Baz : sig
>  	type 'a baz
>  	include Foo with type 'a t = 'a baz
>  	include Bar with type 'a t = 'a baz
> end;;
> 
> but this blows up on the Bar line (multiple definitions of 'a t).
> 
> There is a solution to this, I'm just being stupid and forgetting what it 
> is.  Hints would be appreciated.

Unfortunately, there is no solution to this, as you cannot remove a
declaration from a signature, and include cannot overwrite existing
type definitions. There was a paper in ICFP'2005 on how to solve this,
but I'm not aware of any plan to follow it.

If you're ready to write longer signatures, there is a workaround.

module type T = sig type 'a t end

module FooS(X:T) = struct
  module type S = sig
    val foo : 'a -> 'a X.t
  end
end

module BarS(X:T) = struct
  module type S = sig
    val bar : 'a -> 'a X.t
  end
end

module Baz : sig
  module T : sig type 'a t end
  include FooS(T)
  include BarS(T)
end

The basic idea if you want to be able to construct signatures
modularly is to always keep types and function declarations
separated.

Jacques Garrigue