Conversation

One interesting case of modules in the ML sense is Scala, for instance, which merges them with the object system, while retaining lots of stuff from ML, like module functions and associated types etc.
1
4
Also might be worth looking at Modula-2 as well! Ecmascript has interesting modules too, based on JS objects? Maybe algebraic specification languages too – I think ML drew inspiration from those?
1
4
Anyway, not sure if this helps at all, I probably didn't answer your question very well. I think 's answer was better and more concise! I'm also very much not an expert, just bumbling my way through learning stuff… 🥴
1
4
To me, I kind of think of modules fundamentally as a way of looking at dependent records, but I realise that misses out a bunch of interesting stuff like phase distinctions, abstract types, recursive modules, mixins, module sharing, generativity, etc.
1
2
Definitely helpful! It looks like there's no formal definition or consensus, so the “language X doesn't have real modules” phrase is wrong. Real modules according to who? The last time I read it was in the Lua book, by the Lua author. I think Lua modules are perfectly fine
1
1
Yeah I think it's a bit like ‘real objects’ – there's a bunch of different perspectives and a levels of precision, and I think lots of them have value. Also probably worth chasing down some of the historical work on them, to see how the usage of the term evolved over time.
1
1
Yes, I've realized the history of programming languages is something I like more than programming itself, so whit all these links I have work to do now! Thanks!
1