From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: shang@corp.mot.com (David L. Shang)
Subject: Re: Definition of "operator" (was: OO, C++,
 and something much better!)
Date: 1997/02/19
Message-ID: <1997Feb19.163312.4426@schbbs.mot.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 219864820
Sender: news@schbbs.mot.com (SCHBBS News Account)
References: <33091940.55A8@concentric.net>
Organization: MOTOROLA 
Reply-To: shang@corp.mot.com
Newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object
Date: 1997-02-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <33091940.55A8@concentric.net> Alan Lovejoy  
<alovejoy@concentric.net> writes:

> The point is to get rid of inconsistency and to establish the agreed
> upon usage of common terms--and perhaps to also formally define them, if
> possible.
> 

Have a look at Transframe's expression design. Just a few syntax rules
result in a more powerful and flexible expressions than C++'s. The definition
of operators in Transframe is simple, consistent and user-definable.
For detail, check

	http://www.transframe.com/

at Research/TransframeLanguage page, especially, the article

	The Expressive Function of a Language

David Shang