00:51 <discocaml> <gunpowderguy> Can ocaml infer types across modules? Eg: can implicitly typed function in module 1 be used by another whoose type depends on, on module 2?

00:52 <discocaml> <gunpowderguy> Can OCaml infer types across modules? Specifically, can an implicitly typed function in Module 1 be used by a function in Module 2, whose type depends on the function from Module 1, without explicit type annotations?

00:55 <discocaml> <yawaramin> yes

01:35 <dh`> technically the inference part doesn't span modules, but the answer's still yes

02:49 <discocaml> <gunpowderguy> No, but yes?

02:53 <discocaml> <yawaramin> maybe

02:54 <discocaml> <yawaramin> but also, these questions are really easy to answer by just trying it out

04:10 <discocaml> <wayneyam> Is there a way to download the documentations on ocaml.org to read them offline?

04:13 <discocaml> <wayneyam> hmm it seems like the documentation is generated from the mli files

04:14 <discocaml> <Kali> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/436568060288172044/1337637570242154577/Screenshot_20250207_231403.png?ex=67a82b90&is=67a6da10&hm=8be5f3a8a4d89ca94ffc81f22ce88d0ee0a243e022b0f4e74dcb3d94b2f9ae7c&

04:15 <discocaml> <wayneyam> I mostly use Base

04:15 <discocaml> <Kali> unless you are referring to the packages on ocaml.org then i am not sure

04:15 <discocaml> <Kali> the manual can be downloaded as mentioned here though

04:17 <discocaml> <wayneyam> It seems like odoc is the way but I don't know how to generate the documentations for installed packages

04:19 <discocaml> <Kali> ohhh, yeah, look up how to use odig

04:19 <discocaml> <Kali> https://erratique.ch/software/odig/doc/manual.html

04:33 <discocaml> <wayneyam> It's so clicky I don't wanna click 😢

04:37 <discocaml> <wayneyam> Oh wait it's actually cool

04:37 <discocaml> <wayneyam> now I just need to figure out how to read it inside terminal

07:42 <discocaml> <wayneyam> going to try and generate vimdoc from odoc

08:02 <discocaml> <gooby_diatonic> I think not using Base would help

08:11 <discocaml> <wayneyam> vimdoc is a lot easier to navigate than html or pdf for me so it's probably worth

10:01 <discocaml> <lukstafi> @yawaramin why do you say yes? Isn't the obvious answer to the first question is "no"? I'm not sure if all modules encapsulate type inference, but certainly separate-compilation-units do. Originally OCaml's type system had the principal types property, so it didn't matter: even in practice, theory and practice were the same; now, "theory and practice ain't the same" but close enough for it to not matter for the type of examples given, the ans

10:23 <discocaml> <drupyog> Pretty sure it would be easy to emmit TEF using the memprof API.

10:24 <discocaml> <drupyog> Pretty sure it would be easy to emit TEF using the memprof API.

11:15 <discocaml> <octachron> @lukstafi , my point of the view is that the answer is closer to "yes", because module types are inferred in the absence of explicit signatures. But then technically, all type schemes are known at the module level so the question is slightly confusing.

11:27 <discocaml> <lukstafi> Yes, what I wanted to convey is that it's a good opportunity to gently introduce the notion of principal types when someone starts asking these questions.

12:28 <companion_cube> @drupyog cool, I need to look into that. TEF has decent visualizers already, no need to reinvent the wheel

12:49 <discocaml> <drupyog> the information reported by memprof might need to be massaged a bit though. You will not immediately get spans or things like that.

13:52 <companion_cube> Oh yeah i just want metrics tbh

13:53 <companion_cube> A counter of how much memory was allocated... Maybe per function? It gets displayed as a curve

13:53 <companion_cube> I mean a plot

13:58 <discocaml> <yawaramin> i said 'yes' because if you actually try this out with the compiler, there's no other way to interpret the result than 'yes'

14:03 <discocaml> <deepspacejohn> Yeah, if the question was rephrased as “can module 2 use a function in module 1 if module 1 doesn’t have type annotations” then the answer is clearly yes.

16:04 <discocaml> <lukstafi> Alright, I haven't read the question too carefully.