Wed, 27 Oct 2010 12:08:19 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > retard wrote: >> This is why the basic data structure in functional languages, algebraic >> data types, suits better for this purpose. > > I think you recently demonstrated otherwise, as proven by the widespread > use of Java :-)
I don't understand your logic -- Widespread use of Java proves that algebraic data types aren't a better suited way for expressing compiler's data structures such as syntax trees?
