Possible to refer to record type in same record definition?

[ewmailing]

I want to use the record type that I'm trying to define, sort of like how one would refer to itself in a linked list node struct definition in C.

I want to do something like:

record Foo
    next:Foo
end

and

record Bar
    listOfOtherBars:{Bar}
end

The compiler doesn't like this:
type 'Foo' is not declared compilation aborted due to previous error

The compiler seems to let me workaround this with any.
First, I want to make sure that the any workaround is actually allowed and won't break other assumptions.
Second, I wanted to know if there is a way to explicitly do this without the use of any.

[hugomg]

This is a very embarassing thing we haven't implemented yet: #85
That workaround with any is the best thing we can do for now.