home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!uknet!glasgow!unix.brighton.ac.uk!je
- From: je@unix.brighton.ac.uk (John English)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
- Subject: Re: languages which allow the introduction of new operators
- Message-ID: <1992Nov19.122018.22959@unix.brighton.ac.uk>
- Date: 19 Nov 92 12:20:18 GMT
- References: <Bxnupn.E27@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
- Organization: University of Brighton, UK
- Lines: 24
-
- hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
- : In article <1992Nov13.073809.11835@arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de> wb@arb-phys.uni-dortmund.de (Wilhelm B. Kloke) writes:
- : >In article <BxLxqu.96C@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
- : >You need a (possibly implicitly constructed) structure to make
- : >this sort of assignment possible. Defining an unary operator which
- : >returns a struct is possible at least in C++ and Algol68.
- :
- : I believe it is possible in Algol68, but it is not possible in C++.
- : C++ does not allow the introduction of new operator symbols; only new
- : functions.
-
- Sorry, wrong -- C++ allows existing unary operators to be overloaded
- provided the operand is a class object (the operator is defined as a
- member function of the class). It can then return anything you want
- it to. New operator SYMBOLS are indeed not allowed (none of that
- Algol 68 fun with MONADs, NOMADs and DYADs (what, no DRYADs? :-)
- --
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- John English | "Yes, understanding today's complex world of
- Dept. of Computing | the future IS a little like having bees live
- University of Brighton | in your head... but, there they are..."
- Janet: je @ unix.brighton.ac.uk | "People who live in windowed environments
- Fax: 0273 642405 | shouldn't cast pointers"
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-