Paul D. Anderson wrote:
Sounds like someone needs a strong dose of D!!
http://java.dzone.com/articles/why-java-doesnt-need-operator
The comments bounce between "operator overloading is always bad because you can do idiotic
things with it" and "operator overloading is essential because sometimes you really need
it".
How about a language where operator overloading is available for the cases
where you do really need it, but isn't available in general?
Hmmm...
Paul
OT: that article mentioned one of my biggest pet peeves:
""Doesn't it make much more sense to use add() for a List and put() for
a Map?""
In that case it doesn't matter too much since the interface for the two
functions is different. However, adding a single element to a collection
should have an add() (or +=, or whatever), so that the type of the
collection can be changed/abstracted away (e.x. made a template
argument). This is particularly annoying with "enqueue"/"push" and
"dequeue"/"pop", since there are often times you'd want to change
between stacks and queues without changing the algorithm used.
