On Sat, 1 Aug 2004, skaller wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-08-01 at 03:23, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > On Saturday 31 July 2004 17:35, skaller wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2004-07-31 at 23:44, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > > > Incidentally, does anyone have a functional array implementation (which
> > > > doesn't suck ;-)?
> > >
> > > Map?
> >
> > Well, by "array" I mean a container with O(1) random access where "n" is the
> > number of elements already in the container. ;-)
>
> > Anyway, I'm considering implementing arrays which look functional but which
> > use built-in arrays and keep track of "derived" arrays (e.g. subarrays)

One problem with even the simple minded solution of a type of array
without set is that it isn't a covariant container, like a list, and you can't
make it one, even though that should be allowed. That may not bug you, but it
was an annoyance for me when I discovered this. Jacques Garrigue said it was
probably too much work to fix that. Any functional array you build on top of
arrays gets bit by this.

-- Brian

-------------------
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