Subject: Re: Circular references

From: "Richard A. O'Keefe" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 14:30:13 +1200 (NZST)

> Find another way to represent your information (there is *always*
	> a better method than cyclic terms).
	
	I'm intrigued by your assertion: 
	
	 * what do you mean by "better"?
	
Easier-to-reason-about-programs-for-its-manipulation

	 * can you prove it?
	
In 20 years of Prolog, I've come across one counter-example that I'm
confident of, and one that I'm dubious of.  It's a pragmatic claim,
not a theoretical one.