From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: weis
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id UAA01672 for caml-redistribution; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:14:40 +0100 (MET)
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA21621 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:10:43 +0100 (MET)
Received: from shell5.ba.best.com (shell5.ba.best.com [206.184.139.136])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA02912
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:10:41 +0100 (MET)
Received: from localhost (bpr@localhost)
	by shell5.ba.best.com (8.9.2/8.9.2/best.sh) with ESMTP id LAA20810
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 22 Jan 1999 11:10:40 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 11:10:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Array interface question
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901221056370.3130-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: weis

Hi,
	Why is there no creation function which does not take a default
value for filling the array? When building abstractions like dynamic
arrays or (SRC Modula-3 style) Sequences on top of Arrays I'm forced to 
provide a fill value even though the abstraction really doesn't call for 
one. Is this a simple omission, or is there some compelling reason for 
leaving this out?

-- Brian