[m-dev.] Module qualification of typeclass methods

[Peter Ross]

Simon wrote:
>
> On 31-Oct-2001, Simon Taylor <stayl at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> > On 30-Oct-2001, Peter Ross <peter.ross at miscrit.be> wrote:
> > > Simon wrote:
> > > > How about a different type of `include_module' declaration for which
> > > > the child module is always imported when the parent is imported?
> > > >
> > > This seems to me the correct tradeoff, I like the idea.
> > >
> > > However back to the original question.  Does anyone have any
fundamental
> > > difficulties with typeclasses introducing a new namespace?  I as the
> > > programmer know when writing the code which typeclass method I mean
and
> > > there is a mechanism by which to distinguish two methods with the same
name,
> > > hence I should be able to do it.
> >
> > You already can do it.
> >
> > If the suggested extensions to the module system are implemented,
> > I don't see any additional benefit in having typeclasses introduce
> > a new namespace.
>
The only additional benefit is that you don't have to introduce a new
submodule to get the desired behaviour.

> The proposal is also a step backwards for classes that are already
> defined in a module of the same name, for example library/enum.m.
> With the proposed change, the methods of that class would be
> enum__enum__to_int and enum__enum__from_int.
>
True.

Pete

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------