Markus Mottl wrote:

>On Wed, 01 May 2002, John Prevost wrote:
>
>>The drawback to allowing:
>>
>>let rec ones = 1 :: ones
>>
>>and such expressions is that when looking at the definition of, for
>>example, 'a list and length, one would expect it to be guaranteed that
>>length terminates.  Since you can't prevent recursive use of
>>constructors, well, you can no longer guarantee that.
>>
>
>I second this. Does anybody here really benefit from such cyclic
>structures?
>
Well .. don't they make a good representation of recursive types?

-- 
John Max Skaller, mailto:skaller@ozemail.com.au
snail:10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia.
voice:61-2-9660-0850




-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners