From: Dave Berry <dave@kal.com>
To: Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>, Claudio Russo <crusso@microsoft.com>
Cc: Dave Berry <dave@kal.com>, Alain Frisch <frisch@clipper.ens.fr>,
Caml list <caml-list@inria.fr>,
kfl@it.edu, sestoft@dina.kvl.dk
Subject: RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class m odules)
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 14:13:29 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3145774E67D8D111BE6E00C0DF418B663B15F0@nt.kal.com> (raw)
----Original Message-----
From: Brian Rogoff [mailto:bpr@best.com]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 22:16
>That's no problem for me. Dave, in the case you mentioned, do you think
>this would this be problematic? I couldn't guess from your description.
This example has been bugging me all weekend; I can't reconstruct what it
was. I think we wanted to write a pair of recursive functor applications,
viz:
structure S1 = F1 (S2)
and S2 = F2 (S1);
but I find it hard to believe that the two functors already existed in a
form suitable to apply this way. More likely, I suspect, was that we wanted
to make the minimum modification to each module hierarchy to put them into
this form. In particular, we wanted to avoid having to extract a file to be
shared at the bottom of the two hierarchies, on the grounds that this would
break the abstractions we had set up.
So what I would like from a recursive module feature is the ability to
separately compile two functors and then mutually apply them, as above. (Or
some equivalent using forward declarations, perhaps). I realise that in
separately compiling the two functors I might produce a less efficient
representation for the datatypes that are split across the two functors, but
I could live with that.
Dave.
next reply other threads:[~2001-01-16 10:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-15 14:13 Dave Berry [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-02-09 9:41 Claudio Russo
2001-02-09 16:47 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-02-09 21:45 ` William Chesters
2001-01-14 20:51 Brian Rogoff
2001-01-12 12:12 Claudio Russo
2001-01-11 18:15 Dave Berry
2001-01-11 20:01 ` Brian Rogoff
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3145774E67D8D111BE6E00C0DF418B663B15F0@nt.kal.com \
--to=dave@kal.com \
--cc=bpr@best.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=crusso@microsoft.com \
--cc=frisch@clipper.ens.fr \
--cc=kfl@it.edu \
--cc=sestoft@dina.kvl.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox