From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id WAA28881; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:33:22 +0100 (MET)
X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA28765 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:33:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gAULXKX08831;
	Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:33:20 +0100 (MET)
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id WAA28914; Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:33:20 +0100 (MET)
From: Pierre Weis <pierre.weis@inria.fr>
Message-Id: <200211302133.WAA28914@pauillac.inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Understanding why Ocaml doesn't support operator overloading.
In-Reply-To: <001c01c297bf$436b7a20$4600a8c0@warp> from Nicolas Cannasse at "Nov 29, 102 04:52:03 pm"
To: warplayer@free.fr (Nicolas Cannasse)
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 22:33:19 +0100 (MET)
Cc: xavier.leroy@inria.fr, jhf@hex.no, caml-list@inria.fr
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Precedence: bulk

[...]
> Of course the ML type system relies on type inference and need do choose the
> "best available" type but what if we enrich the type system with an "OR"
> operator ? Then if (+) is overloaded on floats, you'll get :
> 
> f :  int -> int OR float -> float
> or something like a type constraint :   f : 'a -> 'a where 'a in [int;float]
> 
> This approach seems trivial to me,

To me too: I just needed 5 years to set up and publish the theory and
Jun Furuse needed 6 years only to write a thesis with full proofs.

So you're right, it is indeed trivial.

> but I really can understand that this require a lot of addins in the
> typing algorithms & theory. BTW, does one of the upper approach has
> already been discussed ? any paper on it ? any countersample that
> will make me feel stupid ? :)

Yes, they are papers on it (to start with, read my POPL'95 paper with
François Rouaix and Catherine Dubois). You may also have a look to
Jun's thesis http://pauillac.inria.fr/~furuse/thesis/.

Have fun!

Pierre Weis

INRIA, Projet Cristal, Pierre.Weis@inria.fr, http://pauillac.inria.fr/~weis/


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners