> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1993 15:52:38 GMT
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Stupid Haskell question
>
> Apart from the implementation (which doesn't seem to be a problem if
> the right alg. is used[*]) does anyone know of more subtle problems with
> cyclic types [such as not being able to define the type system using
> the traditional sequent style]? Is this a well-studied area?
>
The only problem I can imagine is that equality for recursive types
is nontrivial. Amadio and Cardelli give a complete set of rules for
it in their POPL91 paper.
Satish
