the other huge problem is the poor support for hierarchical namespaces at the package level. nothing like linking your code with a library and having things break because you have a module name clash
Yes, if you give all your modules a generic "toplevel" name like "Utils". However if you use underscores to namespace things you get something a lot like a hierarchy. You just need to have the discipline to call your modules "Myproject_Utils".
Now I didn't say that OCaml has a perfect module system, although some of the first-class module features are stunning, but my point is that it solves a lot of the problems that this C++ guy is complaining about.
right, that's the standard workaround, but it really seems like something the compiler should be doing for you. i find it a very surprising wart in an in general very well-designed module system.
