Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!cs.ed.ac.uk!nick From: nick@cs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) Newsgroups: comp.lang.functional Subject: Re: overloading in SML Message-ID: <12363@skye.cs.ed.ac.uk> Date: 12 Jun 91 10:54:26 GMT References: <1030@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> Sender: nnews@cs.ed.ac.uk Reply-To: nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk Organization: Sally Fowler Rat Pack Lines: 26 In article <1030@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz>, mallsop@suna.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Mark Allsop) writes: > Can you overload operators in SML? No. > left I have the preliminary SML reference manual which refers to 'abstractions' > which look to me like they implement overloading, along with the use of > signatures. Abstractions aren't part of SML either. Some compilers (SML/NJ for example) choose to implement user-level overloading and abstractions. The SML reference manual you refer to is, I believe, a manual for a particular implementation (SML/NJ) rather than the language, for which the "official" reference is the Milner/Tofte/Harper book. By all means, use overloading and abstractions if you want - they're useful - but don't expect portable code. Nick. -- Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk !mcsun!ukc!lfcs!nick ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ <-- WEST VIEWING ROOM EAST VIEWING ROOM -->