Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading

Bart Demoen <bimbart@CS.kuleuven.ac.be>
Wed, 2 Nov 1994 21:08:47 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[27 earlier articles]
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading jhallen@world.std.com (1994-11-01)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de (kanze) (1994-11-01)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading davidm@Rational.COM (1994-10-31)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading bill@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com (1994-11-01)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading drichter@pygmy.owlnet.rice.edu (1994-11-01)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (1994-11-02)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading bimbart@CS.kuleuven.ac.be (Bart Demoen) (1994-11-02)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading monnier@di.epfl.ch (1994-11-01)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading nickb@harlequin.co.uk (1994-11-09)
Re: Polymorphism vs. Overloading franka@europa.com (1994-11-09)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: Bart Demoen <bimbart@CS.kuleuven.ac.be>
Keywords: polymorphism
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 94-11-007
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 21:08:47 GMT

bill@amber.ssd.csd.harris.com (Bill Leonard) writes:


> Polymorphism only makes sense in an object-oriented framework, where one
> type can be "derived" from, and add information to, another.


Polymorphism makes sense in logic-oriented languages as well.


Bart Demoen
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.