From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-29 11:25:17
From: "Bill Seymour" <bill-at-the-office_at_[hidden]>
> 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?
Yes, if the type models, or is supposed to be compatible with, a built-in
type (or a type category.)
-- Peter Dimov Multi Media Ltd.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk