Pardon me for mentioning ML. Yes, Jim Morris suggested ADTs without using the name and the Clu people in their paper on infinitely high-level languages (yeap!) introduced the terms. That doesn't change a thing about the content of my statement.
On Aug 2, 2010, at 11:38 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: > ADTs have nothing to do with ML. They're an older and basic computer > science concept. > > So why do you have an opaque require? Just on simple duality grounds > you should have both or neither. > > Shriram _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev