English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

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: 2007-03-08 (22:14)
From: Ian Zimmerman <nobrowser@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Operator overloading
On 3/8/07, Tom <tom.primozic@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/03/07, Robert Fischer <RFischer@roomandboard.com> wrote:
> >
> > When I see "+", I want to know what that means.
> >
> I disagree and I couldn't disagree more. In mathematics, we're perfectly ?!?
> using + for integer, float, complex, vector and matrix addition (and the
> combinations of them) and * for integer, float, complex, vector, vector and
> scalar, and matrix multiplication. One who doesn't understand what the
> "code" - mathematical notation - means should blame oneself for not
> understanding the algorithm, not the "designer" for making the "language" -
> mathematical conventions - unappropriate.

I agree with Robert and the analogy with maths notation only reinforces that:
when I was a student of maths, I frequently cursed the authors of
papers I was reading for using notation without definition.  Of
course, it was perfectly clear to someone seasoned in the area of the
paper, because the notation was conventional - but a puzzle for a