Roland wrote:
> Pavel Minayev a écrit :
>  
>>if every D user
>>from the very beginning knows that <- is output and -> is input,
>>it will be very hard to convince them to use some other scheme...
>
> while you are reconsidering the way stream are implemented, i personally
> 'feel' better -> as an output
> and <- as an input..(sorry for the trouble).

<dripping_sarcasm>

Clearly this potential confusion is a compelling argument
for eliminating operator overloading, I/O, and the characters
'-', '>', and '<' from the language.

</dripping_sarcasm>

(This isn't at all intended as an attack on your preferences
for I/O operators, Roland, but as a snipe at the operator
overloading fascists.)

-RB

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a6anls$10lr$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> ...unless the author of the language and the community STRONGLY DISCOURAGES such use of operators << and >>. Such guys could overload << and >> for themselves, but hopefully libraries which define these operators for such purposes will be boycotted.

I remember back when C was new and Pascal was the old guard. Many C programmers would write:

    #define BEGIN {
    #define END }

and other such to make their C look like familiar Pascal'ish. After a couple years of that, it became clear to the entire C community that such was the wrong way to go about programming in C, and the practice disappeared under a torrent of ridicule.

It's only natural that programmers moving from C++ to D will start out by programming C++ in D (after all, it's long been recognized that you can write FORTRAN in any language, so why not C++ in D?), and only after a while with the C++isms will get discarded.

I myself sometimes catch myself doing things the C++ way in D, and have to go back and rewrite it. For example, I was using memset() when an array assignment was the D way.