Isn't "+." an ocaml thing rather than ML in general?
I think SML had overloaded numeric operators, though I think that's a special case (i.e. type classes are still better)
Yep, you're right :). I opened the Standard ML book, and there on p75 they list * :: num * num -> num. Then at the bottom they say each function declared as such really has two definitions, one with num replaced by int and one with num replaced by real.
So yes, +. is just an ocaml thing. Not sure about caml.
