Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!sun.arpa!nagler%orb
From: nagler%orb@SUN.ARPA (Rob Nagler)
Newsgroups: net.lang.mod2
Subject: Re: IO (Re: Overloading)
Message-ID: <8603091851.AA07620@orb.sun.uucp>
Date: Sun, 9-Mar-86 13:51:06 EST
Article-I.D.: orb.8603091851.AA07620
Posted: Sun Mar  9 13:51:06 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 05:45:25 EST
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 49


	1) VARARGS (variable number of parameters) and 
	2) variable type of parameter 

One should keep in mind that features add complexity and with 
complexity cems size.  Personally, I think there are far too
many unnecessary features in M2 already.  For example, the CAP
function.  It is nice, but is it necessary?  Local modules are
cute, but do they really serve a purpose, that is, if it is a module,
why not slap a definition on it and make it a separate compilation unit?
The DEC and INC operators don't need to be in the language, they should
be optimized by the compiler or provided by a Assembly language module

So what does this have to do with over-loading?  Well, I like M2 because
it runs on anything that has a processor and a little memory.  Ada
on the other hand is obese with features ane of them overloading. 
Granted, for certain applications it is much more convenient and
comfortable (like a Cadillac limo), but you have to consider what it
is like to use in environments which aren't ammenable to large 
support systems (try driving in rural Italy sometime).  Everything is
a tradeoff, but I can run a full implementation of M2 on an Apple //,
can't say the same for Ada.

A word about IO.  You have to compare frequency with which a shorthand
notation is used, in order to justify its inclusion.  The arithmetic
operators are an obvious example of a useful abbreviation.  Var args
is a pretty serious feature to add and to add it for only one purpose,
condensed IO statements, is (I think) a weak argument.  The number of lines
of IO statements in a module is usually much lower than, say, uses
of arithmetic operators.  In general, most programs don't use complicated
IO features, e.g:
	Enter a filename: farkle.mod
I haven't done a survey, but I bet the number of IO statements that
use more than argument is less than 5% of a program.  I also find that
my IO statements which are very complicated end up being on multiple
lines, anyway.  Therefore, it seems kind of wasteful to include a feature
which doesn't enhance the functionality and is probably not used all
that much.

	Is it too late in the game to tack it on?
It's never too late, but I think it would be unwise.

Rob

PS. I hope those people who do not wish to hear my diatribes will
    not be too greatly offended by my endless musings.  I am VERY
    interested in seeing M2 standardized and it is exactly these types
    of issues which need to be resolved before standardization of 
    the language and library can occur.