Re: [IDEA] auto-type coercion thoughts

On 7 Apr 2004, at 10:41, John Wilson wrote:
> So we are doing speculative conversions (which could have significant 
> computational overhead) to find the right function to call. I think 
> I'd prefer to have an isType() which says if the conversion can be 
> performed rather than trying and seeing what happens when trying to 
> find a function to call.

I don't see how that would change anything other than making it more 
complex to implement and open the possibility of saying you can convert 
to a type but not actually implementing it (or vice versa)?

James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/