OT: on IDEs and code writing on steroids

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Christopher Wright" <dhasenan at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:gv29vn$7a0$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Christopher Wright" <dhasenan at gmail.com> wrote in message 
>> news:gv0p4e$uvv$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> I can see certain potential benefits to the general way C# does 
>>>> generics, but until the old (and I do mean old) issue of "There's an 
>>>> IComparable, so why the hell won't MS give us an IArithmetic so we can 
>>>> actually use arithmetic operators on generic code?" gets fixed (and at 
>>>> this point I'm convinced they've never had any intent of ever fixing 
>>>> that), I don't care how valid the reasoning behind C#'s general 
>>>> approach to generics is, the actual state of C#'s generics still falls 
>>>> squarely into the categories of "crap" and "almost useless".
>>> IArithmetic is impossible in C# because operator overloads are static 
>>> methods, and interfaces cannot specify static methods.
>>
>> Then how does IComparable work?
>
> It uses a member function instead.

And they can't do the same for arithmetic?