On 10/11/2010, at 10:59 PM, John Smith wrote:
> Obvious benefits of this are that conflicting function names
> from imported modules can be used without qualification (verbose)
Why is making life harder for people reading the code counted as
a "benefit"?
Let me offer an example from another language.
aStream next => consume an item from an input stream
and return it
aDate next => same as (aDate addDays: 1).
How do I cope in Smalltalk? Simple: you don't put the type name in the
*function*, you put the type name in the *variable*. If the code says
frobnitz next
I haven't the least clue what it does or where to look to find out.
> it is often desirable to have the same field names
> for many records in the same module.
I'm not sure that it is desirable to have "many records in the
same module" in the first place.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
