"Jonathan Andrew" <jon@ece.arizona.edu> wrote in message news:3D611674.3D0C2921@ece.arizona.edu...
> I don't think it gets much simpler than that. I agree with anderson, good job!

Thanks! I've sinced added a blurb to www.digitalmars.com/d/cpptod.html to highlight the difference between the D way and the C++ way.

"Sean L. Palmer" <seanpalmer@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ajr7iv$1ddn$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> What happened to the nice Vector operator (Vector a) + (Vector b) {}
syntax
> everyone was voting for?

I believe that adds significant complexity to the language, whereas the naming convention route offers equivalent power (or even more power, as the functions can be virtual, variadic, etc.) very simply.

> You figured out a way around the friend problem.

Yes, that one had me stumped for a while.

> Some things just don't properly belong in either class and should be sorta global.

I agree, but since the desired result can be adequately addressed with the member syntax, I thought adding more syntax for global functions was not worth the cost.

"Joe Battelle" <Joe_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:ajr888$1eqp$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "where a is a class or struct object reference..."
> Did I miss something or are we getting concrete types (in C++ parlance) as
well?
> All the examples show class and not struct so--maybe not yet?

The struct overloading is implemented.

>The struct overloading is implemented.
Just for operator members or have you added methods to structs in the general case?

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 18:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Joe Battelle <Joe_member@pathlink.com> wrote:

> Just for operator members or have you added methods to structs in the general case?

They were added loooong ago.

On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 23:53:48 -0700 "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> ftp://www.digitalmars.com/dmdalpha.zip
> 
> www.digitalmars.com/d/operatoroverloading.html
> 
> It doesn't do all the operators yet, but it's a start.

Great. Not the syntax I was expecting, frankly, but hey - it works, and does its job well! Now, as soon as we get all operators (by the way, will binary ~ and ~= be supported? I hope so!), only templates would be left of important C++ functionality not covered by D...

By the way... I proposed this once before, but back then, operator
overloading wasn't implemented. What about input and output operators,
for example -> and <-, to use them for streams and alike where
C++ overloads >> and <<. They wouldn't be allowed on global types,
so you'd have to overload them. But it could be useful:

	int main()
	{
		char[] name;
		cout <- "Enter your name: ";
		cin -> name;
		cout <- "Hello, " <- name <- "!\n";
		return 0;
	}

Well, you get the idea. It could also be some other operator, maybe one of these: @> #> $> :> or something else. I don't care really, it would be just great if there was some better way to output data then printf().

>They were added loooong ago.
Sorry about that, I kept reading this line from the Structs documentation: "Member functions and static members are allowed." as though it had a _not_ in it.  Weird, there's a not right above it--maybe my brain grabbed on to that one :)

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:CFN374879772193056@news.digitalmars.com...
>Great. Not the syntax I was expecting, frankly, but hey - it works, and
does its job well! Now, as soon as we get all operators (by the way, will binary ~ and ~= be supported? I hope so!),

Yes, I just forgot them for the moment.

>only templates would be left of important C++ functionality not covered by
D...

With a much simpler language!

>By the way... I proposed this once before, but back then, operator
overloading wasn't implemented. What about input and output operators,
for example -> and <-, to use them for streams and alike where
C++ overloads >> and <<. They wouldn't be allowed on global types,
so you'd have to overload them. But it could be useful:

I confess I just never liked the idea behind iostreams and the overloaded operators for it. It just never looked right or elegant. It also always seemed to result in fat exe's.

It'll do.  ;)

Now if I can just get a windows.d that has GetFocus() and PeekMessage() in
it...  I'll be in business!

Sean

"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:ajrat2$1kdf$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Sean L. Palmer" <seanpalmer@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ajr7iv$1ddn$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > What happened to the nice Vector operator (Vector a) + (Vector b) {}
> syntax
> > everyone was voting for?
>
> I believe that adds significant complexity to the language, whereas the naming convention route offers equivalent power (or even more power, as
the
> functions can be virtual, variadic, etc.) very simply.
>
> > You figured out a way around the friend problem.
>
> Yes, that one had me stumped for a while.
>
> > Some things just don't properly belong in either class and should be
sorta
> > global.
>
> I agree, but since the desired result can be adequately addressed with the member syntax, I thought adding more syntax for global functions was not worth the cost.

"Sean L. Palmer" <seanpalmer@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:ajsoge$7sn$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Now if I can just get a windows.d that has GetFocus() and PeekMessage() in
> it...  I'll be in business!

ok, ok!