From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C30BC40 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:49:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i9SLnRQf007824 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:49:27 +0200 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA09683 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:49:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ptb-relay02.plus.net (ptb-relay02.plus.net [212.159.14.213]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i9SLnQvS031108 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:49:26 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=chetara) by ptb-relay02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1CNI98-000O6f-6y for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:49:26 +0000 From: Jon Harrop To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: replacing Mathematica was: Polymorphic pretty printing Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:44:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <9410EC84C0872141B27A2726613EF45D02A52DE0@psmrdcex01.psm.pin.safeco.com> <4180D736.2020606@andrej.com> <20041028.151108.108534348.debian00@tiscali.be> In-Reply-To: <20041028.151108.108534348.debian00@tiscali.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200410282244.44931.jon@jdh30.plus.com> X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41816967.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41816966.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 replacing:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 wrote:01 imho:01 notation:01 manipulates:01 vectors:01 matrices:01 ocaml:01 notation:01 overloading:01 cheers:01 ...:98 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: On Thursday 28 October 2004 14:11, Christophe TROESTLER wrote: > IMHO, the main "annoyance" with that goal is notational: there will be > many uses of "+" for example and each of these will need its own > notation. While I am not bothered by the two "+." and "+", this can > become heavy when one manipulates lots of different structures > (vectors, matrices, polynomials, groups,...). GCaml will be great for > this. Yes, OCaml is not well suited to implementing conventional mathematical notation because of operator overloading. However, in GCaml, do the different definitions (e.g. "+" : int -> int -> int | float -> float -> float) have to be specified at the same time (i.e. in the "+" function)? If so, then GCaml is also ill suited... Cheers, Jon.