From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F01FBC69 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 21:51:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.janestcapital.com (janestcapital.com [66.155.124.107]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l28KoxWg005533 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 21:50:59 +0100 Received: from [192.168.250.117] [209.213.205.130] by janestcapital.com with ESMTP (SMTPD-9.10) id A7320118; Thu, 08 Mar 2007 15:50:58 -0500 Message-ID: <45F07732.3020707@janestcapital.com> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 15:50:58 -0500 From: Brian Hurt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Hicks Cc: Robert Fischer , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Operator overloading References: <200703082015.l28KFrfh003479@loompa.cs.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <200703082015.l28KFrfh003479@loompa.cs.umd.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45F07733.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; overloading:01 popl:01 haskell:01 dependencies:01 overloading:01 functor:01 haskell:01 equality:01 equality:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 modules:02 essentially:02 implemented:02 latter:03 Michael Hicks wrote: >This discussion reminds of a paper that appeared at POPL 2007 about the >relationship between ML modules and Haskell type classes. The former are >really good for organizing your namespace and making dependencies and >operations explicit. The latter are really good at (disciplined) operator >overloading (which is convenient as many here have argued). The paper looks >at how the two can be combined (essentially, operator overloading is >implicit functor instantiation), so you can have the best of both worlds. > > The reason type classes were implemented in Haskell was as a sane way to implement a generic equality operator. Myself, I question the need for a generic equality operator. Brian