<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Brandon Allbery <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:allbery.b@gmail.com" target="_blank">allbery.b@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="im">On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Carlos Camarao <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:carlos.camarao@gmail.com" target="_blank">carlos.camarao@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote">
<div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="gmail_quote"><div>Sorry, I think my sentence: </div><div>
"To define (+) as an overloaded operator in Haskell, <br> you have to define and use a type class." <br></div>is not quite correct. I meant that to define any operator in Haskell you have to<br>have a type class defined with that operator as member. <br>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>What? An operator is just an infix function, taken from the set of symbols. Any function can be an operator (and is, via `func` syntax). No typeclass is required to define a random operator.</div>
<div><br></div><div>What did you really mean to say there?</div><span class="HOEnZb"></span></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Sorry, I meant: "To define any _overloaded_ name or operator (i.e. any name/operator that can be overloaded) in Haskell you have to have a type class defined with that name/operator as member. <br>
<br>Cheers,<br><br>Carlos <br></div></div>