It will do some wrangling of literals for you, as long as it can unambiguously decide on an exact type during type-checking.

If no other info is given, it will treat `3 + 3` as Integer + Integer (and emit a compiler warning because it guessed the type).

With `(3 :: Int64) + 3`, the right 3 will resolve to Int64. Same if you swap their positions.

`(3 :: Int64) + (3 :: Int32)` is a compile error.

"Text literals" can become a String, a Text, or a ByteString if you're not explicit about it.

> implicit cast operator

Wouldn't that make it explicit?

> Wouldn't that make it explicit?

No, the casting is still done implicitly. That is I can make the following compile fine in Delphi if I add an implicit cast operator to either Foo or Bar:

    Foo x := Foo.Create();
    Bar y := x;

If neither of them have a suitable implicit cast operator defined, it will of course fail to compile.

Just an example, nothing unique about Delphi. You can see an example of the operator definition here[1].

[1]: https://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Alexandria/en/Oper...

> "Text literals" can become a String, a Text, or a ByteString if you're not explicit about it.

Not without explicitly enabling `OverloadedStrings`!

https://ghc.gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/doc/users_guide/exts/over...