PROPOSAL: Operator overloading by static member function

[Janice Caron]

On 10/13/07, oldrev <oldrev at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's a simple way to avoid using the ugly "opAdd_r", eg:
>
> struct Currency
> {
>   private int m_value;
>
>   public static Currency opAdd(Currency lhs, Currency rhs) {
>     return Currency(lhs.m_value + rhs.m_value);
>   }
> }
>

Returning to the original thread topic, how should the compiler react
if I "cheat" and do

struct Currency
{
  private int m_value;

  public static Currency opAdd(int lhs, int rhs) {
    return Currency(lhs + rhs);
  }
}

I'm sure you can see the problem here. I've just redefined int + int.
Surely, that can't be allowed?