On 2011-02-09 4:43 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > Yes. If we adopt this view, then type class methods and member functions > have a sensible reconciliation. > > But the question will then arise (in the mind of the developer): when do > I use member functions and when do I use type class methods? It becomes > a challenge of design, and not one that is easily resolved. My guess is > that /most/ developers will choose methods, if only because they are > familiar...
I don't follow. Methods and type classes are the same in this view, so they are just choosing type classes. Or are you suggesting that "member functions" are syntactic sugar that desugars into type classes? I don't see any advantage to this view. It seems sensible to simply choose the single, more general abstraction mechanism and stick with it, even if it's a little unfamiliar to developers. Sandro _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
