So currently if you want to overload just one case of an overloaded function,
you have to use an alias for the class to keep the behavior of the other cases.
I talked about it a little in #d, and the only reason that was given was that
it might protect the programmer somehow. But why should the default behavior
cause a sub-classto no longer behave like the class that it extends? Not to
sound like a Java fanboy (I'm not, it's just the only other language I'm able
try it out on right now), but it doesn't require anything like that, and
behaves how I would consider intuitively. Isn't function overloading just
re-using a name? Why is that reason to treat things differently when they're
inherited? Thanks.
