Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
replacing Mathematica was: Polymorphic pretty printing
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Jon Harrop <jon@j...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: replacing Mathematica was: Polymorphic pretty printing
On Thursday 28 October 2004 14:11, Christophe TROESTLER wrote:
> IMHO, the main "annoyance" with that goal is notational: there will be
> many uses of "+" for example and each of these will need its own
> notation.  While I am not bothered by the two "+." and "+", this can
> become heavy when one manipulates lots of different structures
> (vectors, matrices, polynomials, groups,...).  GCaml will be great for
> this.

Yes, OCaml is not well suited to implementing conventional mathematical 
notation because of operator overloading.

However, in GCaml, do the different definitions (e.g. "+" : int -> int -> int 
| float -> float -> float) have to be specified at the same time (i.e. in the 
"+" function)? If so, then GCaml is also ill suited...

Cheers,
Jon.