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
RE: [Caml-list] Operator overloading
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Robert Fischer <RFischer@R...>
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Operator overloading
Exactly.  If I was just going for inference and brevity, I'd still be coding in Perl.

~~ Robert.

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Ian Zimmerman
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 10:28 AM
To: Jon Harrop
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Operator overloading

> But aren't we all here because we like inference and brevity?

Inference: On condition it is _controlled_.  I.e. seeing operator
<foo> used on a complex type, I need to know I have seen its
definition and satisfied myself that it has the expected semantic
properties.  That's just what functors formalize.

Brevity: There's the pesky tradeoff with some type annotations being
required when you introduce overloading.

Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
Beginner's list:
Bug reports: