On Sun, 2005-01-30 at 04:12, brogoff wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005, Remi Vanicat wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:15:43 +0200, Radu Grigore <radugrigore@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Why are cyclic types forbidden?
> > >
> > > I was forced to use the definition:
> > >   type forest = Forest of forest StringMap.t | Empty
> > > where I would have rather used
> > >   type forest = forest StringMap.t
> > > The error is:
> > >   The type abbreviation tree is cyclic
> >
> > You can use the -rectypes of the ocaml compiler or toplevel to allow
> > cyclic type.
> 
> This comes up relatively frequently, and it is known that having -rectypes
> as the default is not a good idea. However, wouldn't explicit typing of
> this case sidestep the known problems and eliminate the need for a
> -rectypes option here?

Do you mean something like:

	type rec forest = forest StringMap.t

where the 'rec' means 'just this type is meant to be cyclic'
(and treat that type as if -rectypes had been given)?

[or types, if there is an 'and' given]


-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net