From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 929C67FB5D
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Sat,  3 Jan 2015 19:18:55 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr) identity=pra; client-ip=212.27.42.3;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr";
  x-sender="Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=212.27.42.3;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr";
  x-sender="Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@smtp3-g21.free.fr) identity=helo;
  client-ip=212.27.42.3;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr";
  x-sender="postmaster@smtp3-g21.free.fr";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnIAALQxqFTUGyoDnGdsb2JhbABYA4c1xleCTwKBBBYBAQEBAREBAQEBAQYNCQkULoQMAQEBAwEjDwEgJQYLCxgCAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBRRMIAQGIIAyoQpNpAQEIAQEBAQEBHIEhjkYXEQWCUoFBBZcIgQ2Ed4gTgzmEEYMxAQEB
X-IPAS-Result: AnIAALQxqFTUGyoDnGdsb2JhbABYA4c1xleCTwKBBBYBAQEBAREBAQEBAQYNCQkULoQMAQEBAwEjDwEgJQYLCxgCAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBRRMIAQGIIAyoQpNpAQEIAQEBAQEBHIEhjkYXEQWCUoFBBZcIgQ2Ed4gTgzmEEYMxAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,691,1413237600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="115512862"
Received: from smtp3-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.3])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 03 Jan 2015 19:18:55 +0100
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (unknown [82.237.71.191])
	by smtp3-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD61A6336
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sat,  3 Jan 2015 19:17:23 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <54A8328E.5020109@inria.fr>
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 19:18:54 +0100
From: Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: caml-list@inria.fr
References: <1088B954-0D62-47D9-B727-2ADE38DD3949@vu.nl>
In-Reply-To: <1088B954-0D62-47D9-B727-2ADE38DD3949@vu.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocamldep & compilation units

On 02/01/15 15:03, Remco Vermeulen wrote:
> baz.ml:
> 	open Foo
> 	...
> 	BAR.x ()
>         …
> 	Bar.y ()
> 
> ocamldep -modules baz.ml, as used by Omake, returns baz.ml: BAR bar.

To add to the useful answers already given, another way to work around
this issue is to use explicit qualification for BAR:

 	open Foo
 	...
 	Foo.BAR.x ()
         …
 	Bar.y ()

That will prevent ocamldep from mistaking BAR for a compilation unit.

Gerd Stolpmann adds:

> But imagine now we had the information with this degree of detail. As
> omake wants to figure out the dependencies it would have to solve a
> puzzle. In your case it is easily to solve, but in practice there are
> often several "open" directives, and in this case you don't even know
> whether "open Foo" opens a compilation unit. I am not sure whether a
> well-performing algorithm even exists (did anybody tackle this
> problem?).

Matthias Blume showed a NP-completeness result for a closely-related problem:

Matthias Blume: Dependency analysis for Standard ML. ACM
Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 21(4): 790-812 (1999)

- Xavier Leroy