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 TAA16342 for caml-redistribution; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 19:17:31 +0100 (MET)
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 PAA13899 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 15:39:24 +0100 (MET)
Received: from post.tepkom.ru (post.tepkom.ru [195.9.10.12])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA28753
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 15:39:21 +0100 (MET)
Received: (from msk@localhost)
	by post.tepkom.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA25484
	for caml-list@inria.fr.ANTIVIRUS; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 17:35:29 +0300
Received: from localhost (msk@localhost)
	by post.tepkom.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA25458;
	Fri, 19 Nov 1999 17:35:28 +0300
X-Authentication-Warning: post.tepkom.ru: msk owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 17:35:28 +0300 (MSK)
From: Anton Moscal <msk@post.tepkom.ru>
To: Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>
cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: RE: Undefined labels
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911151627270.23897-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9911191731090.24672-100000@post.tepkom.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: weis


On Mon, 15 Nov 1999, Brian Rogoff wrote:

> > This is the standard example for why we need a local open in the language.
> > 
> > -Manuel
> 
> Let me second that motion. Coming from Ada, I always wondered why OCaml
> doesn't allow you to restrict the scope of open, instead of putting it 
> always at module level.

This construction can be easy simulated by `let module' construction:

let open M in E 
 =>
let module _TEMP = struct 
   open M;
   let __RES = E
end
in __RES

I implement this conversion for my own use by camlp4 as syntax extension
(with other local declarations: let type, let exception, etc.)

Anton