Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Why are arithmetic functions not polymorph?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Brian Hurt <brian.hurt@q...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why are arithmetic functions not polymorph?
On Fri, 23 May 2003 wrote:

> > SML has a kind of operator overloading, but I don't know the details.
> SML doesn't allow the user to define overloadings, and that is an 
> abomination. Java is similarly abominable. 

Ocaml allows you to define *new* operators to your heart's content.  You
just can't overload the meanings of old operators.  And frankly, I don't
find that abominable at all.  I don't want to turn this into a C++ 
flamefest (had one of those already this week), but in my experience 
operator overloading is *really* *really* bad.


To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: