Clay language

[so]

> In my experience, I have not yet defined a type that uses a multitude of  
> operators with the same code.  In fact, I have only defined the "~=" and  
> "~" operators for the most part.
>
> So I'd say, while my example is not proof that this is a disaster, I  
> think it shows the change in operator overloading cannot yet be declared  
> a success.  One good example does not prove anything just like one bad  
> example does not prove anything.

Operator overloading shines on numeric code, which i guess the targeted  
audience for this feature.
In this case, you mostly change a single character and that is the  
operator.

> I haven't had that experience.  This is just me talking.  Maybe others  
> believe it is good.

This new scheme is just pure win, again for numeric coding.

>> Using operator overloading in conjunction with class inheritance is  
>> rare.

So rare that if you see operator overloading and virtual inheritance,  
you'd better be sure there is not something fishy going on.

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/