abeppu parent
Huh, there must have been something in the water leading up to this.
Also from 1998 is this paper, "Calculus in coinductive form" and neither of these cites the other.
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/705675
These are indeed very similar. Thanks for the link!
The math is a bit over my head, but this formulation seems more difficult than the one I'm familiar with. For example, x^2 is represented as 0::0::2 instead of 0::0::1 (because 2! = 2) and x^3 is represented as 0::0::0::6 instead of 0::0::0::1 (because 3! = 6). Is there a benefit to that?