Re: Overloaded unification

On Jan 28, 1:35 pm, rossb...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
....
> Sure, but AFAICS, all the examples you enumerate can be readily dealt
> with by more principled approaches like plain single parameter type
> cl*****. My question referred to the wildly ad-hoc cases you also
> wanted to be able to handle.
>
> - Andreas

Yes, but (currently at least) I don't want to restrict
programmers just because what they are doing seems
(currently) wild.

Nor will my approach destroy principle typing, I believe.
In detail, each overloaded symbol is unified (in all
possible ways) via a non-overloaded instantiation.  This
results in, for one overloaded symbol with two possible
'meanings', 2^k different typings for k occurances of the
symbol. [This is what I meant by exponential time, by the
way.]  This results in 0, 1 or more correct typings: if none
re****t error, if one fine, if more than one I have yet to
decide what ought to be done.