On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:09:57AM -0500, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > In practice, I observe that there seem to be a relatively small number > of infix operators that people seem to want to introduce. If we can > generate a vaguely sane set of these, I don't see a problem with > predefining the operators into the precedence table and predefining a > set of type classes to go with them.
If you feel sufficiently brave enough to do this, I'm sure it'd work out. C has survived well with out anything as fancy as type classes and manages to get along. C++ does tend to overload the semantics of these operators quite significantly, but if you think that's going to make analysis easier (which, as far as I can tell, is going to be a large part of working with and using BitC) then it seems like a very reasonable compromise. Sam _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
