[SVN] r4750 (OCaml)

[Michael Sheets]

> I'm a bit confused here as to what the structure of these names is  
> supposed to signify.  Mostly because we hove things like  
> entity.name.class.class.type.ocaml refering to classes in OCaml,  
> which are not types, yet this name has type in it.  This inclusion  
> of type is more confusing when you consider that  
> entity.name.class.type.ocaml also has type in the name, but only  
> once, and this is actually a type.  So we should either have one  
> more type in the class type name, or one less (and possibly one  
> less class) in the name for classes.

Basically entity.name.class became a dumping ground for various  
things that weren't classes (module, variant, etc). So it was renamed  
to type with the extension afterwards of .class when it was a class.  
(entity.name.type.class)

The type.class.type is intentional on dpower's part for "class type  
decs in OCaml" in his words. entity.name.type.type is that way  
because the type _is_ type, so it gets the word twice to  
differentiate that.

Hopefully that makes sense. :)

> Are the conventions for naming of entities anywhere online?  The  
> manual only goes one level deep, and doesn't even mention  
> entity.type...

It will be updated soon with entity.type; and we are planning a more  
in depth document about them. For now the manual is the best resource.