[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: overloading __lt, __le to return a userdefined object
- From: steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 13:49:07 +0200
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:42 PM, David Kastrup <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Since the behavior of short-circuit operators can't sensibly be emulated
> by a function, there is no good point to overloading them: overloading
> should not change the semantics of an operation.
This makes sense, so my rhetorical question was stupid.
The times when I felt the lack of general overloading was when
constructing general symbolic expressions, where it would be
_convenient_ for 'a < b' to evaluate as a symbolic expression. But
this feels like a fairly unusual use case and not worth messing with