Hi all,

Someone has links to examples of operator overloading in D? I read the specification, but I was not able to understand it correctly.

I noticed that D doesn't have the operator keyword. I think that this keyword gives more flexibility and power than the simple use of functions (opCmp, opEquals etc). IMHO, it should be added in D.

Thanks,

Bruno.

In article <c6lp1a$1k3i$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Bruno A. Costa says...
>
>Hi all,
>
>Someone has links to examples of operator overloading in D? I read the specification, but I was not able to understand it correctly.

http://www.dsource.org/tutorials/index.php?show_example=43

Justin

>
>I noticed that D doesn't have the operator keyword. I think that this keyword gives more flexibility and power than the simple use of functions (opCmp, opEquals etc). IMHO, it should be added in D.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Bruno.

J C Calvarese wrote:

> In article <c6lp1a$1k3i$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Bruno A. Costa says...
>>
There is an opAssign function, to overload the operator '=' ?


>>Hi all,
>>
>>Someone has links to examples of operator overloading in D? I read the specification, but I was not able to understand it correctly.
> 
> http://www.dsource.org/tutorials/index.php?show_example=43
> 
> Justin
> 
>>
>>I noticed that D doesn't have the operator keyword. I think that this keyword gives more flexibility and power than the simple use of functions (opCmp, opEquals etc). IMHO, it should be added in D.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Bruno.

Bruno A. Costa wrote:
> J C Calvarese wrote:
> 
> 
>>In article <c6lp1a$1k3i$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Bruno A. Costa says...
>>
> There is an opAssign function, to overload the operator '=' ?

No. It was decided (rightly, I think) that the semantics of the '=' operator on classes are ambiguous, so you have to explicitly copy your class with a method.

Chris
> 
> 
> 
>>>Hi all,
>>>
>>>Someone has links to examples of operator overloading in D? I read the
>>>specification, but I was not able to understand it correctly.
>>
>>http://www.dsource.org/tutorials/index.php?show_example=43
>>
>>Justin
>>
>>
>>>I noticed that D doesn't have the operator keyword. I think that this
>>>keyword gives more flexibility and power than the simple use of functions
>>>(opCmp, opEquals etc). IMHO, it should be added in D.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Bruno.
> 
> 

I have to confess I do not understand what was wrong with the C++ syntax. I find it oakward to type "opAddAssign" rather than "+=". Eventually the compiler calls opAddAsign when it reaches +=; what is the benefit of such a name discrepancy?

Sorry I may not get the point but as far as I understand, this D operator replacement achieves exactly the same as C++. Why changing things when there is no additional benefit? Just to give D an identity?

Bruno A. Costa wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Someone has links to examples of operator overloading in D? I read the
> specification, but I was not able to understand it correctly.
> 
> I noticed that D doesn't have the operator keyword. I think that this keyword gives more flexibility and power than the simple use of functions
> (opCmp, opEquals etc). IMHO, it should be added in D.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruno.
> 
> 

FlyTox wrote:

> I have to confess I do not understand what was wrong with the C++ syntax. I find it oakward to type "opAddAssign" rather than "+=". Eventually the compiler calls opAddAsign when it reaches +=; what is the benefit of such a name discrepancy?
>
> Sorry I may not get the point but as far as I understand, this D operator replacement achieves exactly the same as C++. Why changing things when there is no additional benefit? Just to give D an identity?

Rather then having to write some 24 overloads, in D you only need to write 8 to archive the same thing.  Something like that anyway.

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

J Anderson wrote:

> FlyTox wrote:
> 
>> I have to confess I do not understand what was wrong with the C++ syntax. I find it oakward to type "opAddAssign" rather than "+=". Eventually the compiler calls opAddAsign when it reaches +=; what is the benefit of such a name discrepancy?
>>
>> Sorry I may not get the point but as far as I understand, this D operator replacement achieves exactly the same as C++. Why changing things when there is no additional benefit? Just to give D an identity?
> 
> Rather then having to write some 24 overloads, in D you only need to write 8 to archive the same thing.  Something like that anyway.
> 

As I spoke before, this has pros and cons. This facilitates the programming, but removes a little of the flexibility (and elegance, I think) of the language. But it is just my opinion, as a C++ fanatic :)

Cheers,

Bruno

Bruno A. Costa wrote:

>As I spoke before, this has pros and cons. This facilitates the programming,
>but removes a little of the flexibility (and elegance, I think) of the
>language. But it is just my opinion, as a C++ fanatic :)
>
>Cheers,
>
>Bruno
>  
>

Yeah, it's just a C++ withdrawal symptom that a lot of people in the group seem to get.


-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

"Bruno A. Costa" <bruno@codata.com.br> wrote in message news:c6o7ba$2noi$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> As I spoke before, this has pros and cons. This facilitates the
programming,
> but removes a little of the flexibility (and elegance, I think) of the
> language. But it is just my opinion, as a C++ fanatic :)

Actually, giving the operator overloading a name gives it more flexibility, greppability, and elegance. For a small example, consider ++ as a preincrement and a postincrement operator. For a more significant example, how would one do a generalized compare function that will work for <, <=, >= and > of one were restricted to using the various comparison symbols?