Jason Hickey wrote:
> Alex Baretta wrote:
> 
>> I sometimes feel the need for a mu operator. I'm thinking of something 
>> like the following:  ..
>
> I can't give any arguments why your specific syntax is not allowed.  In 
> principle it isn't necessary, since a general fixpoint can be defined.

Why, of course it isn't needed! Neither is let rec needed for that 
matter once you have the fun construct. Y-combinators are all around you ...

Of course, a large number of language features are just syntactic sugar 
which boils down to lambda abstractions and beta reductions. Explicit 
recursion is one of these. What I'm asking for is why the language does 
not provide the sugar for the mu recursive expressions.

Alex

-- 
*********************************************************************
http://www.barettadeit.com/
Baretta DE&IT
A division of Baretta SRL

tel. +39 02 370 111 55
fax. +39 02 370 111 54

Our technology:

The Application System/Xcaml (AS/Xcaml)
<http://www.asxcaml.org/>

The FreerP Project
<http://www.freerp.org/>