Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Polymorphism and the "for" loop
-
Harrison, John R
- John Carr
- Andreas Rossberg
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@p...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Polymorphism and the "for" loop |
Harrison, John R wrote: > > That's true. In any case I assume (given that a recursive type is some > kind of least fixed point) that you can define an empty type in OCaml > like > this: > > # type void = Constr of void;; > type void = Constr of void Try let rec x = Constr x Cheers, - Andreas -- Andreas Rossberg, rossberg@ps.uni-sb.de Let's get rid of those possible thingies! -- TB ------------------- 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