Rationale for not allowing overload of && and ||?

BCS ao at pathlink.com
Wed Jun 18 14:02:12 PDT 2008


Reply to bearophile,

> Joe Gauterin Wrote:
> 
>> What is the rationale for not allowing overloading of && and ||? It
>> seems to me that, with the 'lazy' keyword, D is one of the few
>> languages where overloaded && and || can correctly implement short
>> circuited evaluation.
>> 
> I have created lazyAnd(), lazyOr() in my libs, and I think I like them
> more explicitly named, to avoid confusion. They are shaped like:
> 

|| and && are lazy in D


What does your provide that the native one don't?





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list