[1098] in java-interest
Re: Operator underloading (was: overloading of operators)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael of Very Little Money)
Fri Aug 18 17:13:24 1995
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 14:06:17 -0400
To: owner-java-interest@java.sun.com, java-interest@java.sun.com
In-Reply-To: George Reynolds's message of Thu, 17 Aug 1995 13:27:23 -0400
From: mcampbel@schubert.sbi.com (Michael of Very Little Money)
Reply-To: mcampbel@schubert.sbi.com
In article <199508171727.NAA00892@dvcorp.com> George Reynolds <george@dvcorp.com> writes:
> >> >Any more votes for operator underloading? :-)
> >>
> >> Sound like quite a good idea to me....
>
> I agree!! Lets do it! Any more votes?
As much as I like operator *over*loading, I have to agree.
Hell, let's get rid of operators ALTOGETHER. That would *really* free up some
characters for more variable names.
int +;
int +-;
char ->;
See how much easier it is to read?
if (((+.plus(+-)).int()).gt(->.int()))
do_something;
}
I guess the anti-overload crowd is right. ;-)
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Michael Campbell - mcampbel@offenbach.sbi.com :: I speak only for myself :: |
| I prefer PGP'd mail. Send me your public key! |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Real programmers don't eat quiche. Real programmers don't even know how to |
| spell quiche; they eat Twinkies, Coke and palate-scorching Szechwan food. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
Note to Sun employees: this is an EXTERNAL mailing list!
Info: send 'help' to java-interest-request@java.sun.com
