steven levine

In <KSc1g.69817$Jd.7923@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net> , on 04/18/2006
at 09:29 PM, Michal Necasek <michaln@scitechsoft.com> said:


All languages have features that can be misused. Operator overloading has
its place. When used with some common sense, the intent of the code is
reasonably obvious. When I look at the Mozilla sources there is operator
overloading, but I don't find gratuitous overloading.

IMO, writing REXX without all the signal handlers turned on is similar to
writing C with all the warnings turned off. The tools will allow it and
some folks can even manage to write largish programs that appear to work,
but why bother.

Regards,

Steven

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Levine <steve53@earthlink.bogus.net> MR2/ICE 2.67 #10183
Warp/eCS/DIY/14.103a_W4 http://www.scoug.com irc.fyrelizard.com #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

michal necasek

Operator overloading seems to invite abuse for some reason. I can see
its utility eg. for matrix math, where the overloaded operators are
intuitive and do what most people would expect them to do. It's when the
overloaded operation is non-intuitive or has unexpected side effect when
overloading is a disaster.

In my experience, too many programmers do not have the discipline (or
experience) not to abuse certain language features, so the length of
rope provided by the language ought to be limited


Michal

alex taylor

Indeed, but that's why God (or at least Mike Cowlishaw) gave us
'SIGNAL ON NOVALUE'.

Now if only it worked under VX-REXX...

--
Alex Taylor
http://www.cs-club.org/~alex

Remove hat to reply (reply-to address).

@tin.it

thanks ... I'll have a look at that URL...

--
bye
Alessandro

ilya zakharevich

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
rony


For myself, I translated this as: "I never needed hex literals, so I
thought that example using them will look unnatural to other people too".

Well, since I see a need for hex literals quite often, naturally, it
did not look unnatural to me. ;-)


LOL! What you describe IS a BIGFLOAT (well, usually they are
implemented in binary, but this is not that important at all). Now
try to describe 1/3 as a BIGFLOAT...

Hope this helps,
Ilya