Redefining __dollar for a class ;)

[Jarrett Billingsley]

"Deewiant" <deewiant.doesnotlike.spam at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:eaficf$9lh$1 at digitaldaemon.com...

> This came to mind as I filed Issue 269 in the 'Zilla, so it deserves a 
> bump.
>
> A possible and possibly simpler solution is that when using 
> classInstance[$] it
> would just call the class's length method, which is essentially what it 
> does
> with arrays. This way, foo[$] would always be equivalent to 
> foo[foo.length].

That makes sense.  The compiler would still be able to issue an error if no 
length method existed.  That does seem better.

> Using __dollar like in your code smells bad to me, since names prefixed 
> with __
> are meant for the compiler's use only. If manual overloading of $ were to 
> be
> allowed (i.e. not in the implicit way like I suggested above), it'd likely 
> have
> to be something like opDollar.
>
> And hey, we got opSliceAssign eventually, so we might get this as well! 
> <g>

Yeah, I whined about that one too, didn't I.. :)