Jonathan wrote:
>
>On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 09:45:55AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>> I don't know about this. Sounds cool, but I think we should stick to
>> something that somebody somewhere uses already. Of course, something
>> standard like 0 AD isn't bad.
>
>Standard for whom? I bet there are
J. David Blackstone wrote:
> I always treat the return value of time() as a black-box value. I
>can perform specific actions on it, such as feeding it to localtime()
>or adding relative time intervals to it, such as a year of seconds.
>But I do not allow myself to look at that value. I was ki
went through the archives about RFC22 "builtin switch statement".
didn't see any mention of this, thought I'd throw it in there to see
how it was recieved.
I was thinking that the switch statement could possibly be expanded
to also behave as an operator and not just a control statement.
i.e. the
Now, just to mess with your head a bit ;)
could a case operator be overloadable?
I know the conditional operator currently cannot be overloaded,
but it seems it should be possible. difficulty is another thing though.
Greg London
