Re: [Caml-list] destructive local opens

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

It is remarkable that programming languages have avoided introducing
explicit weakening (the popping of a symbol out of scope) for now, and
I think it is a property that should be preserved. We're not yet ready
to go there.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Hendrik Boom <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com> wrote:
> 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
>
> --
> 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