On 3/10/2011, at 7:15 AM, Du Xi wrote: > > I guess this is what I want, thank you all. Although I still wonder why > something so simple in C++ is actually more verbose and requires less known > features in Haskell...What was the design intent to disallow simple > overloading?
It's not "SIMPLE overloading" you are asking for, but "AD HOC overloading", which may look simple, but really isn't. Taking your C++ f() example, in what sense are the two functions _the same function_? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
