🚀 go-pugleaf

B. Smith-Mannschott argues that type-bound operators violate Oberon's
fully qualified import. Type-bound procedures have already done that. Now,
whether that is a good thing or not, is a different matter but the deed is
already done. (Personally, I'm increasinly inclined to feel that it is not
a good thing.)

As for complication in the compiler, I've actually done it in a compiler
for an Oberon like language and the burden isn't all that high.

So, the question really is, how important is fully qualified import? If
you think it's important, then Oberon-2's type-bound procedures have the
wrong syntax.

If you don't, then simple operator overloading is fairly straightforward.
It's quite useful for things like complex numbers and simple geometric
types. (It is also subject to horrendous abuses, but so are a lot of
programming constructs.)

I put it into the language I was working on because it seemed like a clear
extension of type-bound procedures. Now that I'm looking at recasting
their syntax, it looks like operator overloading will have to go away as
well.

Mark