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 VAA22628; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:44:05 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA22631 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:44:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from t2.fast.net.uk (ns1.fast.net.uk [212.42.162.2]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3FJj5jq013077 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:45:06 +0200 Received: from htec.demon.co.uk (adsl-212-42-169-63.fast.net.uk [212.42.169.63]) by t2.fast.net.uk (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i3FJi1bd015941 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:44:01 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from cq@htec.demon.co.uk) Message-ID: <407EE5E1.6060603@htec.demon.co.uk> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:43:29 +0100 From: Christopher Quinn User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why not 'include' in an .mli file? References: <20040414164148.GA18109@redhat.com> <20040414165252.GB19016@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <20040414165252.GB19016@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 mli:01 dismissed:01 submodule:01 intf:01 mli:01 intf:01 compiler:01 chris:01 chris:01 quinn:01 imho:01 htec:01 restrict:02 module:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk it strikes me that a cmi file can be thought of as comprising a module type, and the compiler might be extended to allow for Richard's usage, which imho is a natural one. i believe this is in the wish list db from way back and not dismissed or otherwise classified. chris > > Note that this is a module type, not a module. You could put the > module type (interface) of "Analysis_p" into the submodule "S" of the > extra-file "analysis_p_intf.mli". Use it then to restrict the interface > of "Analysis_p" in "analysis_p.mli", and include it in "analysis.mli" > using "include Analysis_p_intf.S". > > Regards, > Markus > -- thanks. - chris ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners