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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID 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: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/02/22 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 220562053 Distribution: world References: <5de62l$f13$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> Followup-To: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object Date: 1997-02-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <5einvs$i0l@news1.ucsd.edu> kennel@lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes: > : This use of the word "operator" > : - is pretty much standard in mathematics > : - refers to a *semantic* property rather than a *syntactic* one > : - refers to a property that "+" does not have in any major programming > : language. > Thank you. I too feel the grating of my auditory cortex upon > hearing descriptions of "+" as an ''operator'' in programming > languages, and sigh upon sadly seeing such use enshrined in say, C++ > syntax. Well, being a mathematician, I too can understand where you're coming from. But, OTOH, I don't think it is a big deal to use the term in a different way in PL/CS land - as long as it is at least consistent. Which, unfortunately at this point in time, it isn't. /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com