On Feb 13, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Jonathan Cast wrote:
Usually `when no ambiguity can arise', no? Plenty of mathematical
practice rests on imprecision and the expectation that the human
reader
will understand what you mean. Haskell has to be understandable by
the
machine (which is less forgiving, but also more reasonable!) as well.
Yes, and name overloading is decidable for machines as well, as the
feature exists in numerous languages, and from time to time, we hear
talk of the feature for Haskell, as well.
Unless you, say, enjoy having type inference or something.
Name overloading and type inference are not incompatible -- the issue
has been discussed here before, though I'm too lazy to dig up the
conversation.
Regards,
John A. De Goes
N-BRAIN, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net | 877-376-2724 x 101
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
