Re: Modular explicits in pre-OCaml 5.5

Indeed. Modular explicit does not add any expressiveness to the language 
(and does not impact the soundness of the type system). Every program 
that can be written using modular explicits could have been written with 
a functor encoded as a first-class module.

We presented this encoding in section 1.5 of this paper about modular 
explicits : https://hal.science/hal-05428136/document

On 6/25/26 14:45, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> Thanks for pointing this out. Does this mean that modular explicits, 
> strictly speaking, bring no additional expressivity but only a simpler 
> way to do these things? Or are there programs that could be expressed 
> with modular explicits but not with constrained module types?