Why is OCaml's (+) not polymorphic?

Question

I am an OCaml newbie. I like OCaml\'s speed but I don\'t fully understand its design. For example, I would like the + operator to be polymorphic to support inte

Answer 1

I would like the '+' operator to be polymorphic to support integer, float and so on. Why do we need '+.'?

Excellent question. There are many subtle trade-offs involved here.

The advantages of not overloading operators (as in OCaml) are:

• Type inference is simpler and more predictable.
• Code is more composable: moving code from one place to another cannot affect its meaning.
• Predictable performance: you always know exactly which function is being invoked.

The disadvantages are:

• Number of different operators quickly gets out of control: + for int, +. for float, +/ for arbitrary-precision rationals, +| for vectors, +|| for matrices and the complex numbers, low-dimensional vectors and matrices, homogeneous coordinates etc.

Some alternatives are:

• Closed ad-hoc polymorphism and equality types as in Standard ML: slightly more complicated type inference, code no longer composable but a good solution for a fixed number of pre-defined types.
• Open ad-hoc polymorphism and equality types as in F#: same as SML but can be applied to user-defined types as well. Expressive, fast and bug free but overloading is limited to certain operators and run-time resolution is prohibited.
• Type classes as in Haskell: expressive but complicated and unpredictably slow due to potential run-time resolution.
• Implicit promotion as in C/C++: simple but causes bugs like 2.3/0 and 1/12*3.7.
• Dynamic typing as in Lisp's numerical tower: unpredictably slow.