On May 31, 2016 7:09:22 PM EDT, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchevski@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:05 PM, rstewart <rstewart@ptd.net> wrote:
"Emil Dotchevski" <emildotchevski@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Rob Stewart <rstewart@ptd.net> wrote:
On May 31, 2016 5:41:54 PM EDT, Emil Dotchevski < emildotchevski@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Chris Glover <c.d.glover@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm generally not in favor of adding stuff to C++. What's the upside in this case? To be able to say p.do_something() instead of do_something(p), because the latter offends Java programmers? :)
The upside is not writing some calls one way and others the other way on the same object, and having to remember which is which.
So, don't use the dot syntax. :)
Not all functions can be non-members.
Do you mean e.g. virtual functions? They can be hidden behind free function wrappers.
I had in mind operators like +=, for example. ___ Rob (Sent from my portable computation engine)