ChucK complains at the following: // ========== public class FooPie { fun void bark() { <<< "woof" >>>; } fun int bark(int value) { return value * 2; } } // ========== saying "[foo_pie.ck]:line(3): function 'FooPie.bark' matches 'FooPie.bark' but cannot overload..." This seems odd to me. bark(void) and bark(int) are two different functions -- aren't they? -- so why should ChucK require them to have the same return type? (Perhaps I'm just pining for Objective C, where the internal function names would be FooPie.bark:void and FooPie.bark:int which are clearly different functions.) Unless Ge thinks this is a bug, I'm really only looking for an explanation as to whether or not foo(void) and foo(int) are the same function or not. Or at least how to think about functions with the same name with different argument signatures. - Rob