Hi Toive, thanks for the quick reply. Concerning my use case, I found that there is an even easier solution without using an assignment overload at all in the meantime. But it is good to know that it does not exist. Thus, as far as I can see, the best alternative is to introduce a function assign(f,x) and evoke f = x within together with other custom code. That's not too much of a problem in case I need it in future. Best, Thorsten
On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 9:52:50 PM UTC+2, Toivo Henningsson wrote: > > The answer is basically no. Assignment to an identifier always creates a > new binding for that identifier, possibly after converting the right hand > side to the type of the variable in question. > For an object x, > > x[inds...] = a > > can be overloaded (this is the setindex! function). At some point it might > become possible to overload > > x.y = a > > As for alternatives: What is your use case?
