+1 (what Stefan said) Is there a way to auto-generate something appropriate that takes care of the ambiguity with Bool that pops up frequently, for numerical methods that never intend being called with Bool arg(s)?
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 3:08:20 PM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > I've always felt that arbitrarily breaking a tie is just asking for > trouble when ties actually occur since the choice that's made is rather > likely to be wrong. At this point it seems fairly clear that > definition-time warnings about method ambiguities are usually too annoying, > especially between unrelated modules. It would probably be best to retain > warnings for ambiguous methods within a module and make invocation of other > ambiguous cases a runtime error. > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Steven G. Johnson <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> >> >> On Monday, April 18, 2016 at 10:38:28 AM UTC-4, Didier Verna wrote: >>> >>> >>> Julia warns you when there's an ambiguity in method specificity, and >>> picks one "arbitrarily" (according to the manual). I guess arbitrarily >>> doesn't mean random. Is there a particular reason for not >>> standardizing a tie-breaker (possibly the one currently in use) ? >>> >> >> Because any practical tie-breaker rules are probably too complicated to >> be useful? >> > >
