Base.div vs Html.div - specialize or not?

[Palli]

@kristoffer.carlsson

if you extend Base.div it should mean the same. Otherwise, you have no idea what generic code means because

Base.div is always binary numeric arguments (or with third optional argument), while for HTML always (one?) string. Maybe I have “no idea”, but does it not save us if div for HTML is always a unary function? I’m thinking of the practical implications of specializing. I looked at your link to a much longer discussion than I have time for now… and from there a link to:

Two modules with the same exported function name but different signature

Hello, I have the following situation which I did not expected: defining a fucntion with the same name but different signature in two modules like this: ## Module RawTables function save(T::RawTable, name_pref::String) ... end ## Module RawPlots function save(T::RawPlot, name_pref::String) ... end and using them together results in WARNING: both RawPlots and RawTables export "save"; uses of it in module Main must be qualified I thought multiple dispatch is exactly good in being able to res…

I just know Julia for web programming, is also very important, so I hate to have this dilemma, and would like the most natural div (without needing macros or prefixing). Is this about mostly about the help text for div, that can’t be(?) extended. Can we allow for some impurity here?Would it make something slower?

SInce ÷ points to div (also for the help text), you could do very confusing…:

julia> ÷("text for div")
text for div

About the help text, should it be “x ÷ y” rather than current “÷(x, y)”?