From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pierre.weis@inria.fr>
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB25ABB81
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:34:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iAK3YU7P024687
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:34:30 +0100
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA05653 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:34:30 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lakermmtao12.cox.net (lakermmtao12.cox.net [68.230.240.27])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iAK3YTdA029160
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:34:29 +0100
Received: from SPIKESHOMEPC ([68.228.151.51]) by lakermmtao12.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-117-20041022) with ESMTP
          id <20041120033427.HHDG8344.lakermmtao12.cox.net@SPIKESHOMEPC>
          for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:34:27 -0500
From: "John F. Hughes" <jfh@cs.brown.edu>
To: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Questions on modules
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:34:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Thread-Index: AcTOsdkVSVHvQT1hT/eu9MOUmOepPw==
Message-Id: <20041120033427.HHDG8344.lakermmtao12.cox.net@SPIKESHOMEPC>
X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 419EBB46.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 419EBB45.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; struct:01 bindings:01 restrictive:01 foo:01 sig:01 foo:01 struct:01 --john:01 ...:98 signatures:01 functions:01 modules:01 int:01 int:01 variables:02 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.0.0
X-Spam-Level: 


I'm trying to make sense of the module language; I find that there
are useful analogies with the "value language" (where there are 
variables, functions, etc.) It appears that the following are 
reasonable: 

1. "module" has a meaning corresponding to "let"; I see

let x = 5;;

and

module T = struct
  type t = int
  let c = 1
end;;

as analogous -- both establish bindings for names, more or less. 

2. types and signatures are less strongly analogous, because "having a
certain
type" is more restrictive than "matching a signature", but still,
"module type" 
seems to be analogous to "type". 

let x:int = 5;;

module type FOO = sig type t end;;

and

module T:FOO = struct
  type t = int
  let c = 1
end;;

seem analogous as well. 

But I'm allowed to write

let (x:int) = 5

and *not* allowed to write 

module (T:FOO) = struct
  type t = int
  let c = 1
end;;

----
Can someone give me a reason for this design decision? 

I appreciate your help...

--John Hughes