YES(?,O(n^1))
900.09/297.03	YES(?,O(n^1))
900.09/297.03	
900.09/297.03	We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
900.09/297.03	certificate YES(?,O(n^1)).
900.09/297.03	
900.09/297.03	Strict Trs:
900.09/297.03	  { rev(rev(x)) -> x
900.09/297.03	  , rev(nil()) -> nil()
900.09/297.03	  , rev(++(x, y)) -> ++(rev(y), rev(x))
900.09/297.03	  , ++(x, nil()) -> x
900.09/297.03	  , ++(x, ++(y, z)) -> ++(++(x, y), z)
900.09/297.03	  , ++(nil(), y) -> y
900.09/297.03	  , ++(.(x, y), z) -> .(x, ++(y, z))
900.09/297.03	  , make(x) -> .(x, nil()) }
900.09/297.03	Obligation:
900.09/297.03	  runtime complexity
900.09/297.03	Answer:
900.09/297.03	  YES(?,O(n^1))
900.09/297.03	
900.09/297.03	The problem is match-bounded by 1. The enriched problem is
900.09/297.03	compatible with the following automaton.
900.09/297.03	{ rev_0(2) -> 1
900.09/297.03	, rev_0(4) -> 1
900.09/297.03	, nil_0() -> 2
900.09/297.03	, nil_0() -> 3
900.09/297.03	, nil_0() -> 6
900.09/297.03	, nil_1() -> 1
900.09/297.03	, ++_0(2, 2) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ++_0(2, 4) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ++_0(4, 2) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ++_0(4, 4) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ++_1(2, 2) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ++_1(2, 4) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ++_1(4, 2) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ++_1(4, 4) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ._0(2, 2) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ._0(2, 2) -> 4
900.09/297.03	, ._0(2, 2) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ._0(2, 4) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ._0(2, 4) -> 4
900.09/297.03	, ._0(2, 4) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ._0(4, 2) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ._0(4, 2) -> 4
900.09/297.03	, ._0(4, 2) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ._0(4, 4) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ._0(4, 4) -> 4
900.09/297.03	, ._0(4, 4) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ._1(2, 1) -> 5
900.09/297.03	, ._1(2, 6) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ._1(2, 6) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, ._1(4, 1) -> 5
900.09/297.03	, ._1(4, 6) -> 3
900.09/297.03	, ._1(4, 6) -> 6
900.09/297.03	, make_0(2) -> 5
900.09/297.03	, make_0(4) -> 5 }
900.09/297.03	
900.09/297.03	Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))
900.65/297.59	EOF