Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!snorkelwacker!husc6!spdcc!ima!esegue!compilers-sender
From: pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Defining polymorphism vs. overloading
Keywords: polymorphism
Message-ID: <12977@june.cs.washington.edu>
Date: 7 Sep 90 16:52:16 GMT
References: <8133@amelia.nas.nasa.gov>
Sender: compilers-sender@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel)
Organization: University of Washington, Computer Science, Seattle
Lines: 21
Approved: compilers@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us

>[Ongoing discussion of overloading and polymorphism]

To summarize:

Given the name of of an operator where that operator applies to
several types, the operator is

* Polymorphic if all implementations are derived from a single
  specification.
* Ad-hoc polymorphic or overloaded if the implementations are derived
  from several specifications.

Oversimplified, but close?

	;-D on  ( A rose by any other name would be polymorphic )  Pardo
-- 
		    pardo@cs.washington.edu
    {rutgers,cornell,ucsd,ubc-cs,tektronix}!uw-beaver!june!pardo
-- 
Send compilers articles to compilers@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us
{ima | spdcc | world}!esegue.  Meta-mail to compilers-request@esegue.