On Wed, May 13, 2020, 10:22 PM Greg A. Woods wrote: > At Thu, 14 May 2020 09:36:57 +1000 (EST), Dave Horsfall > wrote: > Subject: Re: [TUHS] v7 K&R C > > > > On Tue, 12 May 2020, Paul Winalski wrote: > > > > > o operator overloading > > > > [...] > > > > I never could figure out why Stroustrup implemented that "feature"; > > let's see, this operator usually means this, except when you use it in > > that situation in which case it means something else. Now, try > > debugging that. > > Well in the true OO world the ability to "overload" a message (aka what > is sometimes effectively an operator) allows a wise designer to apply > the traditional meaning of that message (operator) to a new kind of > object. Attempts to change the meaning of a message (operator) when > applied to already well known objects is forbidden by good taste and > sane reviewers. > > C++ being a bit of a dog's breakfast seems to have given some people the > idea that they can get away with abusing operator overloading for what > can only amount to obfuscation. > Queue rant about << and >> overloading... Warner -- > Greg A. Woods > > Kelowna, BC +1 250 762-7675 RoboHack > Planix, Inc. Avoncote Farms >