🚀 go-pugleaf

  I wrote
  >Unfortunately that approach removes type checking and you can put the wrong
  >data type into your tree.

  bevan replied
  >Not if you create a separate module where the parameters have the
  >correct type and must be coerced to the above.

But how many types could you have that you would want to have in a tree.
All the cards, ints, reals, chars, arrays of cards, arrays of chars,
records with a card and a sting, records with a string and a real, records
with two strings, ..... Quite a large variety, would you want to have a
module for every type.

  bevan also replied
  >Granted you could get this wrong, but if you do it once, you can use
  >it as a template and then just use search/replace to create a new
  >module with the correct type.  If the compiler is any good, it should
  >be able to inline all the interface procedures and so it doesn't cost
  >you anything at runtime.

Templates. Yes thats the way i do it. I don't use generic tree modules like
that as a pre-compiled library but i get the source code, make a part of the
current project and compile it as part of the current project.
  Its less useful that a true library module, but it does allow for code
reuse with no modifications so chances are that it works correctly.

John Andrea