Re: [Caml-list] Why should I use .mli files?

[Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>]

> It makes sense to me that such a signature item in a .ml file should be
> restricted to being immediately before the value binding it applies to.

It makes sense, but then the (include (module type)) feature I was
proposing to avoid duplicating transparent definition from the .mli
into the .ml doesn't work anymore. I need a sufficiently relaxed
syntax that allows to put signature items at the top of the file and
use them afterwards.

I don't think any restriction of this kind would be sufficient nor
necessary to dispel Daniel's fears. Daniel, I fully agree that .mli
are helpful and should be preserved, and my suggestion was precisely
in the sense of making the .ml/.mli combination more convenient for
users, so that they would have less incentive to use the .ml alone.
There is not much in the feature proposal that would allow to get rid
of the .mli anymore that it currently is the case, so I don't
understand your opposition based on this particular argument.

(On the other side, I must note that your argument that ".ml/.mli
redundancy should be handled by tooling" could be reused in the
converse direction: the .mli (including documentation if present in
the source) could be produced from the .ml by tooling. In the absence
of such tooling, I don't give much weight to either arguments which
are a modern form of the too-convenient Sufficiently Smart Compiler
point of view.)

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Edgar Friendly <thelema314@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 5:59 AM, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
>>
>> Gabriel Scherer a écrit :
>>>
>>> Allowing signatures items in structures and .ml files alone does not
>>> increase the expressivity of the language.
>>
>> I'm against this idea. This means that you have to skim trough the whole
>> ml file to actually understand what the module signature is. This is very
>> inconvenient.
>
> It makes sense to me that such a signature item in a .ml file should be
> restricted to being immediately before the value binding it applies to.
> i.e.
>
> val foo : 'a -> 'a
> let foo x = x
>
> would be legal, while the following would not be allowed:
>
> val foo: 'a -> 'a
> val bar: int -> string
> let foo x = x
> let bar = string_of_int
>
> This should solve the "skim through the whole ml file" problem.
>
> E.
>
>
> --
> 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