X-FeedAbuse: http://nntpfeed.proxad.net/abuse.pl feeded by 88.191.16.109
Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.42!gegeweb.eu!nntpfeed.proxad.net!nospam.fr.eu.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!74.125.46.80.MISMATCH!postnews.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:45:59 -0500
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 14:46:04 -0700
From: Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: looping through a list, starting at 1
References: <list-20110802003845@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <8djj37pg6o35jb1b8lskefb4jmb2iadmbe@4ax.com> <nospam-9625F7.23364303082011@news.aioe.org> <4e3a5a4c$0$2527$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk> <9a04aaFp76U1@mid.individual.net> <j1eoba$uj6$1@dont-email.me> <Q7Odnef35YdGmqbTnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <j1f3ds$d7i$1@dont-email.me>
In-Reply-To: <j1f3ds$d7i$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <5-SdnQLc1oSKjqbTnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 23
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.230.200.54
X-Trace: sv3-EmDJAwLQMOUkASQ6/capkGdK+t7lPWgvTIXsaxNAgz2APHQOGiiYSzcRd1xPALVEHpjvB14YzGssJvb!oQcymZh6/o7Q12RLGjq9nsA4mgl3Ys9Ucqm05s5zV7RAn3K8EeEikPl70GRBsut7gqeFVEfAQsNe!cCNeuxlLB+z6DEjn949h1rh3oT1KAdbiIQmOeHyVAmXfQg==
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2098
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6798

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 "+"?
>
>
> 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?

Patricia