Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:09:59 +0100, Simon Marlow <simonmar@microsoft.com> pisze:
Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that
module M ( module A ) where import B as A
exports the contents of module B? A isn't even a module!
A is a name of a module as far as this module source is concerned. You can write A.whatever and names are qualified with module names, so A must be considered a module name...
The old definition claims that 'module M where' is the same as 'module M (module M) where' which is a nice property. Perhaps we can clarify the definition so that this is the case.
Oops, it's indeed a problem.
One way to do this is to make 'module M' exports refer to the actual module M, not including any modules renamed to M.
I would definitely not do that. A renamed module should be consistently referred to by its new name. The only problem is whether 'module M where' is specified in terms of where definitions come from or in terms of source rewriting to 'module M (explicit export list) where'. I can't decide. What could be the purpose of renaming a module into the same name as the current module? What behavior would be more useful then? I think that both variants are logically explainable, so it should be decided on the basis of usefulness and expectability (is "expectability" an English word?). -- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk * qrczak@knm.org.pl http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/ \__/ ^^ SYGNATURA ZASTÊPCZA QRCZAK