Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Why is the type of a plus ( + ) considered to be int -> int -> int as opposed to (int * int) -> int? To me, the second makes sense because it “accepts” a 2-tuple (the addends) and returns a single int (their sum).
Thank you!
You can make a language where
(+)has the type(int * int) -> int. In fact, SML works exactly this way. It just affects the meaning of infix operators. However OCaml conventions strongly favor the use of curried functions (of the typea -> b -> c) rather than uncurried ones. One nice result is that you can partially apply them. For example ((+) 7) is a meaningful expression of typeint -> int. I find this notation useful quite often.