Browse thread
[Caml-list] Why are arithmetic functions not polymorph?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | brogoff@s... |
| Subject: | Re: easy print and read (was: [Caml-list] Why are arithmetic functions not polymorph?) |
On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, Pierre Weis wrote: [... snipped lots of good stuff I enthusiastically agree with ...] > Bibliography and further readings: > ================================== Let me add that if you don't want to read lots of type theory papers even if it's good for you, that the GCaml implementation README at http://cristal.inria.fr/~furuse/generics/README.gcaml takes you on a quick walk through what you can do, and it's pretty cool. I'm really looking forward to the next version, which will hopefully include modules. I also wonder about how the object system will fit in with all of this. The interaction of generics with all of this "non-core" ML is still a mystery to us anxious users :-) BTW, someone (Brian Hurt?) brought up a nice simple example of where the current generic polymorphism seems a bit weak generic one = | int => 1 | float => 1.0 ;; generic two = | int => 2 | float => 2.0 ;; generic plus = | float -> float -> float => (+.) | int -> int -> int => (+);; plus one two;; (* Can't determine plus without at least one type annotation *) and it would be nice if in such situations the correct plus could be inferred. This is very exciting stuff! Beyond overloading, this system provides a type safe value IO and dynamic typing capabilities. -- Brian ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners