sexplib.syntax -- bitstring.syntax discrepancy

[Matej Kosik]

Dear all,

At the moment, I am using GODI.

When I compile my program with "sexplib.syntax" package,
I do not have to mention "sexplib".

This seems right.

However, when I compile my program with "bitstring.syntax",
I can't omit "bitstring" from the list of packages.

Is this on purpose?
Are there situations when one might want to load "bitstring.syntax"
package but not "bitstring" package?

[Richard W.M. Jones]

It's probably a bug, but the format of META files is obscure and not
very documented so I wrote the one for bitstring mostly by
cargo-culting from various other META files. Patches welcome ...

Rich.

--
Richard Jones
Red Hat