Re: generic * and 0

[SZAVAI Gyula]

Kevin Ryde wrote:
> "Mikael Djurfeldt" <address@hidden> writes:
>   
> > (Not entirely sure that the common zero is a good idea, but I tend
> > to think so.)
> >     
>
> I suppose it's a question of whether "*" should do that, or leave it
> up to the application.
>   

I think there are 3 solution:
1, make * really generic (non-associative, no 0, no 1)
2, make * non-generic
3, document this strange behaviour

But present undocumented half-genericity is annoying.

Thanks
     s