<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Mar 3, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Kris Nuttycombe <<a href="mailto:kris.nuttycombe@gmail.com" class="">kris.nuttycombe@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">This is an interesting assertion; I don't believe that these goals work against one another at all. In fact, I find that (b) leads to "if it compiles, it works" much more often than not. John De Goes goes into depth on this principle here:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><a href="http://degoes.net/articles/insufficiently-polymorphic" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">http://degoes.net/articles/insufficiently-polymorphic</a><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>where he points out "Monomorphic code is much more likely to be incorrect than polymorphic code, because for every type signature, there are many more possible implementations.".</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Ah -- very good point. This is true for the *implementation* of a polymorphic function, where a polymorphic type signature beautifully restricts what the function can do. But it is not true for monomorphic *uses* of a polymorphic function, where the generality can lead to an unexpected instance selection and thus runtime behavior.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Richard</div></body></html>