25 Oct
2002
25 Oct
'02
9:28 a.m.
Ketil Z Malde <ketil@ii.uib.no> writes:
My vote would be to scrap it. Enum sounds like it defines an ordering of elements, and that's IMHO not what the actual implementation looks
Just before everybody else points it out; that's a bit imprecise. But the IMHO obvious way to regard succ would be to provide a succession of all the elements in a set, rather than just add one to a numeric interpretation of the value. Defining [x..y] in terms of succ sound counter-intuitive to me (and isn't a different mechanism needed for [x,y..z] anyway?) -kzm -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants