[Agda] why coinductive?

[Thorsten Altenkirch]

Hi,

I am just writing some lecture notes hence I noticed something else. Why do we have to say coinductive when defining a recursive record, aka a coinductive type? This seems asymmetric because we don’t have t say anything when defining a recursive sum (like the natural numbers)? Is this just a relic from the days that records couldn’t be recursive or is there a technical reason?

Btw, I really would like to have destructors for coinductive types (another asymmetry).

Thorsten



This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
attachment. 

Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored 
where permitted by law.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chalmers.se/pipermail/agda/attachments/20200301/1a0be44f/attachment.html>