From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id JAA20141 for caml-redistribution; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 09:30:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA18206 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 07:20:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from www.nextsolution.co.jp (www.nextsolution.co.jp [202.33.245.114]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA24750 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 07:20:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from sparc3.co.jp (sparc3 [202.235.80.3]) by www.nextsolution.co.jp (SMI-8.6/) with ESMTP id OAA23470 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:18:56 +0900 Received: by sparc3.co.jp (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA00374; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:21:46 +0900 Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:21:46 +0900 From: christo@nextsolution.co.jp (Frank Christoph) Message-Id: <199707240521.OAA00374@sparc3.co.jp> To: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Subject: Re: Managing module names X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: weis > >>>>> "monniaux" == David Monniaux writes: > monniaux> Would it be possible to make up some scheme that would to > monniaux> things like: /graphics/blackwhite/main -> > monniaux> Graphics.Blackwhite.Main ? > > monniaux> Or, better: would it be interesting according to other users? > > Absolutely! I think that such an arrangement would be even more useful > than what exists presently. In my experience, nested modules are not very useful in (O)CAML because you cannot have a recursive definition cross a module boundary, and I find that I quite often have mutual dependencies between sets of definitions whose namespaces I would nevertheless like to separate. I suspect that the reason package nesting in Java works so well is partly due to the fact that recursion, etc. is hardly ever used. On the other hand, SML seems to use module nesting quite freely, though, and as far as I know it has the same restrictions on module dependencies... -- FC