Michael Hicks wrote:

>This discussion reminds of a paper that appeared at POPL 2007 about the
>relationship between ML modules and Haskell type classes.  The former are
>really good for organizing your namespace and making dependencies and
>operations explicit.  The latter are really good at (disciplined) operator
>overloading (which is convenient as many here have argued).  The paper looks
>at how the two can be combined (essentially, operator overloading is
>implicit functor instantiation), so you can have the best of both worlds.
>  
>

The reason type classes were implemented in Haskell was as a sane way to 
implement a generic equality operator.  Myself, I question the need for 
a generic equality operator.

Brian