>>> I.e., what he's calling "tree" would be "node of a tree" in C.
>
>> Yeah, I should have been clearer about that. A list *node* is a union. A
>> tree *node* is a union.
>
>    What would the harm be if eg. list nodes were structs instead?

Nothing. It's just that in Haskell, you can't implement it that way. 
[Correction: You can't implement *finite* lists that way.] And, with 
unions being a fundamental part of the language, you don't need to.

Post a reply to this message