Re: A Pointless Library Proposal

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Samuel Bronson wrote:

On 23 Oct 2006 22:05:58 -0400, kahl@cas.mcmaster.ca wrote:

...

I'd say that ``Void'' is not a desirable candidate since too many people know C, and the C type ``void'' corresponds to ``()'' (or ``IO ()''...)

So how come whenever I say that, someone invariably corrects me that C's void type is uninhabited, whereas the () type is inhabited by ()? And that a real void-alike wouldn't have any constructors?

Because C's an impure language - and thus it's possible to do something meaningful without returning a value. Oh, and because they're right. -- flippa@flippac.org The task of the academic is not to scale great intellectual mountains, but to flatten them.