Sat May 29 06:17:06 EDT 2004
>>>>> "Matthew" == Matthew Flatt <mflatt at cs.utah.edu> writes:
Matthew> I suppose it would be easy to have a "unit-too.ss" language that
Matthew> effectively copies a module body, with one copy at the module top-level
Matthew> and another copy in an exported unit. (The code couldn't actually have
Matthew> to be duplicated, of course. The module-level bindings might be
Matthew> obtained by invoking the unit.)
Ermh, I'm afraid I can't follow. Could you elaborate a bit?
Matthew> Is that the sort of thing that you have in mind?
Probably not. I think I have in mind that the programmer would really
write down a module as
+ import interfaces
Then there'd be a unique, but *separate* mapping of interfaces to
implementations. I'm not sure this would have to be part of the
language---the linker could figure it out trivially if there's only
one implementation per interface. This would leave the door open to
later extend things to handle true components.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
More information about the R6RS