Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote: > After all, == and != are already overloaded.
Jerry D. Hedden replied: > And how is that an argument AGAINST adding ""-overloading? > I see it as a supporting argument. IMHO, the fact that == > and != are overloaded for threads, but "" is not, constitutes > a bug by omission. Rafael Garcia-Suarez came back with: > but eq already works for threads equality, no ? Equality overloading on threads objects has been in the code "from the beginning". I didn't add it. Yes, 'eq' works on threads objects, so technically the overloading is necessary. However, it's there, and my opinion is that string overloading should be added, as well, for completeness/consistency - not to mention convenience. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
