Re: [Caml-list] Why are modules handled differently by the interpreter and the compiler

[Didier Cassirame <didier.cassirame@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1769 bytes --]

Hi Alain,

I don't have that problem on my projects.
Could you please give us a simple example of a project which exposes the
described behaviour?

Didier

2012/11/3 Alain Coste <alaincoste@club-internet.fr>

> **
> Hello,
> Back to a problem which I have always found annoying in OCaml. I hoped the
> version 4.0 would solve it, but it seams nothing changed..
> While developping a project, It's interesting to use the interpreter (for
> test, debugging) AND the compiler (to have program run faster when
> everything goes wright).
> Now, when the project is divided in several modules, each module being a
> structure written in a .ml file (with possibly a signature in a .mli file),
> you can't simply use the interpreter and the compiler on the same files.
> The interpreter loads the modules with their names (say M), and you can
> refer to its identifiers with M.foo, in the standard way.
> The compiler adds one level of "modularity", as it encapsulates the
> contents of the file with "module M ...end". So now its identiifers should
> be referenced as M.M.foo !!
> I found two possible work-arounds to this :
>    - comment out all my top-level decarations of module before compiling
> the files
>             needs to be undone and redone every time I want to reuse the
> interpreter for testing after a change in the the program
>    - copy all the files in one file and compile this unique file
>             this process is easy to automatize, but I loose the advantages
> of separate compilation
>
> Can somebody explain the rationale behind this behavior. Or, if this is
> only for historical and compatibility reasons, could it be possible to have
> an option "-please_don't_encapsulate" (or something shorter...) for the
> compiler ?
>
> Alain Coste
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2636 bytes --]