English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Breaking out of iterative loops
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-05-02 (09:14)
From: Francois Pottier <francois.pottier@i...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Breaking out of iterative loops

On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 10:33:35AM +0200, Markus Mottl wrote:
> I second this. Does anybody here really benefit from such cyclic
> structures?

Yes, they can be useful, at least when they are mutable. Sometimes
a pointer to a known node (i.e. a cyclic pointer) can be used instead
of None. This can save the use of an option type, for instance.
Anyway, in the presence of mutable fields, you can't prevent cyclic
structures from appearing, so there is no point in disallowing their
explicit definition.

The situation is different in the case of immutable structures. I
don't know of any situation where immutable, cyclic structures are

François Pottier
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