Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Operator overloading
[
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: | 2007-03-08 (20:51) |
From: | Brian Hurt <bhurt@j...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Operator overloading |
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