[boost] Re: detail::atomic_counter

From: Bill Seymour (bill-at-the-office_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-29 11:16:53

Peter Dimov wrote:
>
> ... every programmer needs to realize, sooner or later,
> that when the specification of type X says that ++x may
> return void, then it really may return void ...
>

In accordance with what I've heard called the "principle
of least surprise," isn't it important that overloaded
operators do the same kinds of things that they do for
built-in types?

This isn't just for the benefit of novices.  As one who
likes his code to be as self-documenting as possible
[but no more 8-)], if 

  void increment();

is what I mean, then that's really what I'd rather write.
IMO, the extra keystrokes are a Good Thing.

--Bill Seymour