retard: > BTW, how does D handle functional dependencies between types? You have to ask me that again in a simpler way, with one or more examples, etc. :-) My guess is that D doesn't handle that much.
> Type class is a higher level abstraction. Some consider it to be one of > the best features in languages like Haskell. The similar feature in C++0x > was concept maps or something like that. The problem is they also add some complexity to C++ that's already too much complex. In D you don't have explicit concept maps, but you can create something simpler that has similar purposes. > But even in the abandoned c++0x proposal, checking axioms was optional > IIRC. Checking axioms is hard in a language like C++, you need a language like Coq. But hereI was not talking about checking axioms, I was talking about using them (assumed as true by the compiler) for optimization purposes. Bye, bearophile
