From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBBAEBBAF for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:27:05 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqMCAAIZckjUGyobgWdsb2JhbACBXJEBAQEQIAOYToU/ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.30,318,1212357600"; d="scan'208";a="27106189" Received: from smtp1-g19.free.fr ([212.27.42.27]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Jul 2008 22:27:05 +0200 Received: from smtp1-g19.free.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DDE91AB2BE for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:27:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c5850-a2-3-62-147-11-140.dial.proxad.net [62.147.11.140]) by smtp1-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2250A1AB2AE for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 22:27:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 20:28:39 +0200 From: Fabrice Marchant To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] functions' recursive construction Message-ID: <20080707202839.272a4b0b@free.fr> In-Reply-To: References: <20080707200128.4e125865@free.fr> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.2.0 (GTK+ 2.12.10; i486-pc-linux-gnu) X-Face: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; recursive:01 coq:01 swift:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 lisp:02 neumann:02 hint:04 types:05 jul:05 guessed:07 cases:08 cases:08 function:08 fabrice:08 On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 15:04:17 -0500 "William Neumann" wrote: > For a quick hint as to why you cannot write such a function, ask > yourself what the type of f would be. > > Consider just the two cases of the type of (f 1) and (f 2). Thanks for your swift answer, So it's 'No', as I guessed, because the types of your two cases are different. After Coq, maybe could we program this in Lisp ? Regards, Fabrice