At Sat, 3 Apr 2010 06:31:58 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > 1. match expander > > 2. constructor > > 3. struct type info > > > > Both 1 and 3 are static values so they'll conflict with each other. > > The solution here is for one or both of these to be a struct property, > rather than a struct, so that one struct can be both.
Having `struct-info'ness be a property is probably a good idea. > Another possibility is that `match' could treat identifiers bound to > static struct info as pattern constructors, even without them being > match expanders. This would probably be really easy to implement. I think that's a good idea. (It's what I had in mind originally.) _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
