On Wednesday, 6 November 2013 at 18:02:32 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> But such
> expectations need not correspond to language rules (try to
think from
> from language laywer perspective).
I still argue that the expression -expr must have the same type
as expr.
> In bearophile case, I guess
> Typedef!double overloads unary operator which returns double
which is
> primary reason for such behavior.
That's what I deduced from qznc's post and tried to mean that
such behavior would be confusing to programmers.
Ali
I think that reason for such behavior is the way used defined
operator overloading functions are implemented, not the language
per se, so programmers confuse themselves.
