Re: Generics not overloadable

["Mark Lundquist" <up.yerz@nospam.com>]

"Ian Wild" <ian@cfmu.eurocontrol.int> wrote in message
news:3C0611EB.F7E0E1A9@cfmu.eurocontrol.int...
> Mark Lundquist wrote:
> >
> ...
> > 2) Of what use is a name denoting a generic unit within its own formal
part?
> > You certainly can't instantiate the generic there.  What else can you
bloody
> > well do with a generic unit (in general) besides instantiate it?
>
> It can call itself recursively.

Huh?

Yes - a name occuring within the body of the generic unit denoted by that
name refers to the "current instance" of the generic.

I believe that's what you're talking about -- but that's not what my post
was about :-)

-- mark