On 22 February 2006 14:55, Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote: > Simon Marlow wrote: >> there's a lack of modularity in the current >> design, such that renaming the root of a module hierarchy requires >> editing every single source file in the hierarchy. The only good >> reason for this is the separation between language and >> implementation. > > I don't see how this is related to implementation. Surely all the > language spec has to say is that the implementation has some > unspecified way of finding the code for a module given only its > canonical name,
The point is that currently the language definition includes everything necessary to determine the meaning of a multi-module program. Losing this property is unfortunate, but probably ultimately necessary. To answer your question, yes - the spec would have to refer to an implementation-defined way to pair module definitions with import declarations. Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime