Re: [Caml-list] destructive local opens

[Hendrik Boom <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com>]

On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:22:44PM +0000, vrotaru.md@gmail.com wrote:
> Thinking a bit more about the subject of "local un-open" I think I may not
> even mind a recursive variant, but with slightly different syntax, and the
> following interpreation: A "local un-open" undo the effect of local open,
> that is, no symbols from the opened module are visible. Than those can be
> nested with the with the obvious interpretation
> 
> So with '+' defined in M, N and at the top level and ~(... ) being "local
> un-open" and a expression like the one below:
> 
>    M.( .... N.( .. + .. ~( .. + ... ~(.. + ..) .. ))
> 
> first  '+' would be N.+ the second one M.+ and the last the top level one.
> 
> Too clumsy I guess.. Well it was fun. And I will throw in just one more
> possibility: explicit unopeninng of modules.
> 
> ~M.(... ) - which may make sense for unshadowing symbols from Pervasives.

Reminds me of quoteing and unquoting in  Lisps.  Also generates 
gibberish very quickly.

Not that it isn't very useful, though.

-- hendrik

> 
> -- 
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs