RE: [Caml-list] Operator overloading

["Robert Fischer" <RFischer@RoomAndBoard.com>]

I didn't realize that existed.  It's not so bad -- it lets me have my
cake and Jon eat it, too.  :D

~~ Robert.

-----Original Message-----
From: caml-list-bounces@yquem.inria.fr
[mailto:caml-list-bounces@yquem.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Fernando Alegre
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:25 PM
To: Jon Harrop
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Operator overloading


On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 07:40:42PM +0000, Jon Harrop wrote:

> For me, operator overloading is about clarity. In the absence of
operator 
> overloading, you cannot regain the lost clarity using modules and
functors.


I often use the poor man's local operator overloading already built into
the core OCaml:

let result =
    let (+) = Vector.add and ( * ) (x:int) (v:Vector.t) =
Vector.scalarmul x v
    in 3 * a + 2 * b

This makes overloading local and explicit, and at the same time makes
expressions clear. I do not miss implicit overloading.

Fernando

_______________________________________________
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs