Re: How to merge required operations under a common name
Dear Oliver
I defer to experts who know more about languages than I do, but it seems to me your question is a language issue on which the standard doesn't have a view. The text at the end of 1788 §6.3 seems especially relevant:
> Just as the standard is not concerned with the actual names or invocation methods, this conceptual view of libraries is independent of how the operations are presented in an actual computing environment: it could be via programming libraries, language primitives, infix operators, or other means. Also an implementation might permit the arity of an operation, or the datatype of any of its arguments, to be variable - possibly determined at run time. An implementation shall document how the formal operations are mapped to language entities.
Regards
John Pryce
On 25 Jan 2016, at 23:45, Oliver Heimlich <oliver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am facing the following question when implementing the standard
> document: May I implement separate required operations under a common name?...