Peter Buckingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >There are a couple of reasons for overloading. simple arithmetic operations, you >can use plus(int, int), plus(float, float). another approach is to use >genericity like in eiffel, and the templates in C++, which is probably better in >the sense that you only have one function ie plus(<type>, <type>). And of course perl has plus(<type>,<type>) as its default ;-) If that is "better" why are we suggesting we change it ? -- Nick Ing-Simmons
- RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overloading Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overloadin... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overloadin... Ask Bjoern Hansen
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overlo... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method ov... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based metho... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based ... Peter Buckingham
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-ba... Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method ov... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based metho... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overloadin... Nick Ing-Simmons
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overlo... Graham Barr
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method ov... David L. Nicol
- RE: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overloadin... Evan Howarth
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method overlo... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 97 (v1) prototype-based method ov... Piers Cawley