From: Matthias B. <bl...@re...> - 2001-09-19 15:09:42
|
Andrew Kennedy wrote: > > (A) Agree on some way to map top-level SML Module identifiers (for > structures, functors and signatures) to full file names identifying the > file that contains the single binding for that Module entity (structure, > functor or signature). Sorry. I will NEVER agree to that! We had this discussion before in an OCaml vs. SML context. A naming convention such as the above can be used by an implementation, but it should _not_ be the common ground on which we all live. It is trivial to map implicit file naming such as the one you suggest to explicit naming, but not vice versa. As I said, I will try to come up with a simple (although perhaps verbose) and very explicit description format that we all can implement. Systems such as CM or your implementation can take whatever scheme they use and _generate_ the explicit format. It is unlikely that we will ever agree on a high-level format (I for one will never agree to a modulename->filename mapping scheme, and others seem to think that such as scheme is the only way they can accept), so abstracting from this issue is the only way to go. Matthias |