* [Caml-list] Module equivalence across definitions
@ 2001-10-13 18:07 Lauri Alanko
2001-10-17 7:05 ` Tom Hirschowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Lauri Alanko @ 2001-10-13 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: caml-list
[Pardon for possible duplicates]
Hello. Given:
module type T = sig
type t
end
module A : T = struct
type t = A
end
module B(X:T) = struct
type t = B
let v = B
end
module type CT = sig
val a : B(A).t
end
module C : CT = struct
module Aalias = A
module BA = B(Aalias)
let a = BA.v
end
I get an error:
Signature mismatch:
Modules do not match:
sig
module Aalias : sig type t = A.t end
module BA : sig type t = B(Aalias).t = B val v : t end
val a : BA.t
end
is not included in
CT
Values do not match: val a : BA.t is not included in val a : B(A).t
But changing "module BA = B(Aalias)" to "module BA = B(A)" makes everything
work.
What gives? I'm used to seeing structural equivalence being used everywhere
in O'Caml's type system, but here simply renaming a module seems to give it
a distinct new identity. Is this a bug or a feature?
Lauri Alanko
la@iki.fi
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [Caml-list] Module equivalence across definitions
2001-10-13 18:07 [Caml-list] Module equivalence across definitions Lauri Alanko
@ 2001-10-17 7:05 ` Tom Hirschowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tom Hirschowitz @ 2001-10-17 7:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lauri Alanko; +Cc: caml-list
Hi,
I think it is more a question of datatypes than of
applicative functors, in the sense that if you replace
the module B with something like
module B(X:T) = struct
type t = int
let v = 2
end
then it works.
It's just because sum types are some kind of abstract
types, the constructors interfacing them with the outer
world. For instance :
# module A = struct type t = A end;;
# module B = struct type t = A end;;
# A.A = B.A;;
This expression has type A.t but is here used with type B.t
Do you agree?
Lauri Alanko writes:
> [Pardon for possible duplicates]
>
> Hello. Given:
>
>
> module type T = sig
> type t
> end
>
> module A : T = struct
> type t = A
> end
>
> module B(X:T) = struct
> type t = B
> let v = B
> end
>
> module type CT = sig
> val a : B(A).t
> end
>
> module C : CT = struct
> module Aalias = A
> module BA = B(Aalias)
> let a = BA.v
> end
>
>
> I get an error:
>
>
> Signature mismatch:
> Modules do not match:
> sig
> module Aalias : sig type t = A.t end
> module BA : sig type t = B(Aalias).t = B val v : t end
> val a : BA.t
> end
> is not included in
> CT
> Values do not match: val a : BA.t is not included in val a : B(A).t
>
>
> But changing "module BA = B(Aalias)" to "module BA = B(A)" makes everything
> work.
>
> What gives? I'm used to seeing structural equivalence being used everywhere
> in O'Caml's type system, but here simply renaming a module seems to give it
> a distinct new identity. Is this a bug or a feature?
>
>
> Lauri Alanko
> la@iki.fi
> -------------------
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
> 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/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-10-17 7:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-10-13 18:07 [Caml-list] Module equivalence across definitions Lauri Alanko
2001-10-17 7:05 ` Tom Hirschowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox