]> | I've been batting around ideas for ways to do balanced trees so that no | matter what order you add things, you always get the same tree. But even | assuming you could do this, doing a structural compare is still O(N). So | you might as well let the trees be different. Right, but see my second message --- I'm only interested in canonicity up to structural equality and I'm happy with O(N) comparison. So it's just the "no matter what order you add things you get the same tree" property that I care about. But it's not yet obvious to me whether I can even achieve that much. John. ------------------- 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