From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id JAA21637; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:45:16 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 JAA21593 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:45:15 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f7P7jEj18304; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:45:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id JAA21321; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:45:13 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:45:13 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: Winfried Dreckmann Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] include with Message-ID: <20010825094513.A21522@pauillac.inria.fr> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from wd@lidingo.mail.telia.com on Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 09:37:41PM +0000 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > > PS: The docs seem to be somewhat `conservative' on include for > > signatures: they say the syntax is > > > > include modtype-path > > > > but obviously it is the more general > > > > include module-type > > Is is safe to use the less conservative version? I believe it's quite > useful. The documentation is wrong and will be corrected. The intended operation is indeed "include module-type", and that's what the compiler implements. Feel free to use it. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- 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