Why do you say "every name and operator" ? Why do you say "fully qualified" ?
When there is some clash, hiding the offending name or importing
"qualified as" is
quite satisfying imho.
Thu
2009/2/13 John A. De Goes
The signal-to-noise ratio with fully qualified names/operators goes way down -- that's the need.
Go take one of your programs and fully qualify every name and every operator. Doesn't look so pretty then, does it? And it wouldn't be easy to read, either.
Regards,
John A. De Goes N-BRAIN, Inc. The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net | 877-376-2724 x 101
On Feb 13, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, John A. De Goes wrote:
In any case, no one has really addressed the original poster's question: No, "name overloading" is not possible in Haskell, and surprisingly, there are no blocking technical issues why this must be the case.
Prefixing names with module names is good style: http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Qualified_names Where is the need for more overloading?
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe