[m-dev.] Module qualification of typeclass methods

[Peter Ross]

On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 11:16:35AM +0100, Peter Ross wrote:
> Fergus wrote:
> > On 15-Nov-2001, Peter Ross <peter.ross at miscrit.be> wrote:
> > > One Simon has added a section about the difference between
> > > implementation and interface sub-modules to the reference manual.  The
> > > compiler doesn't obey these rules.  I have used implementation
> > > sub-modules from modules that weren't the parent module.  This will also
> > > need to be fixed if we don't add to the meaning of include_module.
> >
> > Are you sure?  There's a test for this in tests/invalid;
> > the files in question are test_nested.m, parent.m, and
> parent.private_child.m.
> > The compiler correctly reports an error in this case.
> >
> > There's a related case in parent.undeclared_child.m,
> > which currently we don't detect.  That does need to be fixed.
> > (The comment in tests/invalid/Mmakefile, explaining why this
> > test cases is commented out, says "just not yet implemented".)
> > Maybe that is what you're thinking of?
> >
> See the test case include_parent.m in my change.  include_parent__nested is
> an implementation module but I call it from include_module.
> 
That is the test case in hardcoded/sub-modules/ not the one in invalid.

Pete
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------