[
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: | 2007-03-09 (16:40) |
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----- From: caml-list-bounces@yquem.inria.fr [mailto:caml-list-bounces@yquem.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Ian Zimmerman Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 10:28 AM To: Jon Harrop Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr 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: http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs