Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #6802
| Date | 2011-08-05 10:09 +0100 |
|---|---|
| From | RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 |
| References | (4 earlier) <9a04aaFp76U1@mid.individual.net> <j1eoba$uj6$1@dont-email.me> <Q7Odnef35YdGmqbTnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <j1f3ds$d7i$1@dont-email.me> <5-SdnQLc1oSKjqbTnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| Message-ID | <4e3bb343$0$2491$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk> (permalink) |
| Organization | Zen Internet |
On 04/08/2011 22:46, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 8/4/2011 2:36 PM, markspace wrote: >> On 8/4/2011 1:58 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>> On 8/4/2011 11:27 AM, markspace wrote: >>>> On 8/4/2011 10:47 AM, Chris Riesbeck wrote: >>>>> In C++, an >>>>> overloaded postfix ++ >>>>> >>>> See? This is why I'm against any kind of operator overloading in Java. >>>> Too much stupid out there. >>> >>> So what operator should have been used for String concatenation, instead >>> of overloading "+"? We could use '.' Then we could use '->' for method invocation. And '::' for class namespace separators (or whatever they are called). ;-) >> I think the obvious interpretation of my comment should be "user defined >> operator overloading." >> >> > > Why should the appropriateness of an operator overloading be affected by > who did it? It shouldn't but I imagine markspace's objection might have been that whilst we all learn about the varied uses of '+' at the start of learning Java, I expect it can be a little perplexing when you encounter a '+' that makes no sense until you find where the original programmer defined an overload of that operator. Even worse might be a '+' that apparently makes sense but where you do not realise that the operator has been overloaded. Is this possible? -- RGB
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-08-03 15:40 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-08-03 20:53 -0300
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-08-03 21:10 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-08-03 21:22 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-08-03 23:36 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-08-04 09:37 +0100
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Chris Riesbeck <Chris.Riesbeck@gmail.com> - 2011-08-04 12:47 -0500
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 markspace <-@.> - 2011-08-04 11:27 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-08-04 13:58 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 markspace <-@.> - 2011-08-04 14:36 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-08-04 14:46 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-08-05 10:09 +0100
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-08-05 14:46 -0700
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-08-04 20:51 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> - 2011-08-05 08:38 -0400
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-08-05 10:22 +0000
Re: looping through a list, starting at 1 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 09:05 -0700
csiph-web