Libraries and hierarchies
Ross Paterson
ross@soi.city.ac.uk
Fri, 8 Aug 2003 15:15:05 +0100
Would you mind illustrating the source-to-source transformation on
a small example? Suppose there's a package foo with a module
module C where f = 'a'
that this package is grafted in at both A.B and X, and there's a module
module Foo (f) where
import A.B.C (f)
import X.C (f)
> Documentation is an important point. We could have dynamic
> documentation that changes with the grafting (Haddock.cgi, anyone?), or
> we could use relative module names only in the documentation. Or we
> could just continue to use the default module names. In practice, I
> don't think using the default module names in the documentation will
> lead to many difficulties - most of the time, people aren't going to use
> any weird local graftings. The Haddock documentation will probably
> including information about where the root of the package is for each
> module (it already contains the package name).
I also can't see much to gain from local graftings. But that leaves us
wanting each combination of
default root for package + local module name
unique across all packages, doesn't it?