Re: Declaration design preference: type or name first

On 12 Nov, 11:17, Robbert Haarman <comp.lang.m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 10:10:54AM -0800, James Harris wrote:
> > On 6 Nov, 08:39, torb...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Torben ?gidius Mogensen)
>
> > > > Sorry, can't bring myself to go with inferred types. (Why do you
like
> > > > them?)
>
> > > For several reasons:
>
> > >  1. It makes the programs shorter.
>
> > But it also makes them ambiguous.
>
> I don't see what you mean here. As long as the behavior of the type
> inferencer is well-specified, I don't think there is anything about type
> inference that makes programs ambiguous.

We are getting into areas I am not really ready yet to discuss but
since you asked I am thinking of two cases (rightly or wrongly):

1. a human /reader/ would not know what data types were meant without
examining a lot of context.

2. the code could easily apply more widely than the /writer/ intended
(or wanted).

> > >  2. You don't have to decide in advance how polymorphic/generic your
> > >     functions are -- the type inference makes them maximally
> > >     polymorphic.
>
> > I want control over how polymorphic functions are.
>
> You can have type inference and still be allowed to specify types. Then
> you have control for when you need it, and succinctness when you want
> it.

I see your point. Lets say that if I read someone else's code I want
to be able to see how polymorphic his functions are!

--
James