Re: Function name problem

[dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner)]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 20:47:41 GMT, David C. Hoos, Sr. <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> wrote:
>
>David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> wrote in message
>news:85stib$a2g1@news.cis.okstate.edu...
>> it. If I could use Unicode in writing programs, I can see a few places
>> where mathematical symbols would make nice operators, but still,
>> a {dot symbol} b and a {cross symbol} b aren't superior enough to
>> Dot(a,b) and Cross (a, b) to make the precidence and readibility
>> problems worth it.
>Beside which, the parameter/return type profiles of dot product and
>cross product are unique, so you can just use the "*" operator
>for these.

I wouldn't. Target typing is a feature that's prone to abuse, and 
overloading * for the dot product _and_ the cross product seems
like it could cause confusion. a := b * c; would mean dramatically
different things based on whether a was vector or scalar.

(Target typing is something unnerved me when coming from C++, because
it seems wrong not to be able to decide the type of an expression
without the context. I now understand why it's much more necessary in
Ada than C++ or Modula-3, because of the variety of distinct builtin 
types in Ada and lack of conversions, but it's still not one of my
favorite features.)

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe; 
if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire.
   -- Friedrich Nietzsche