Operator Overloading Strawman for Harmony

Michael Daumling mdaeumli at adobe.com
Fri Jan 9 07:56:53 PST 2009


The discussion about operator overloading quickly went away from the JavaScript'ish approach that ExtendScript and your proposal used towards generic functions. At some time, the discussion stranded in areas too exotic for me. There is a rationale here: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=discussion:operators

Michael

From: Mark S. Miller [mailto:erights at google.com]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 7:48 AM
To: Michael Daumling
Cc: es-discuss
Subject: Re: Operator Overloading Strawman for Harmony

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Michael Daumling <mdaeumli at adobe.com<mailto:mdaeumli at adobe.com>> wrote:

Hi Mark,

This is very close to the pattern that Adobe's ExtendScript already offers, and that has been rejected before, unfortunately. The differences are:

Hi Michael,

Yes, this is indeed quite similar. Why was it rejected? Do the reasons for rejection apply equally well to the present proposal?


--
   Cheers,
   --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20090109/6d02f976/attachment.html>


More information about the Es-discuss mailing list