Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   pinskia (pinskia@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 25-Nov-2024 12:46:59 JST pinskia

   in reply to

   • anna

   @navi I can think of examples where the base operator might not show up at least directly when dealing with operator overloads. E.g. you provide a "backwards" compatible API for the overload. Like say multiprecision; then you either have the backwards compatible API call into the new overload instead of the other way around.

   And yes it is awful semantics for more than above too.

   • Embed this notice
     anna (navi@social.vlhl.dev)'s status on Monday, 25-Nov-2024 12:47:01 JST anna
     i now remember the operator overloading for c paper and the silly way to avoid abuse (basically avoiding c++'s iostream abuse of shift ops)
     
     their solution? the function that you attach to an operator... must contain that base operator inside it...
     
     this is such awful semantics