From: Endlisnis Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Namespaces Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 13:17:13 -0300 Organization: NBTel Internet Lines: 27 Message-ID: <35FBF009.2A5A984A@unb.ca> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: fctnts08c48.nbnet.nb.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > I don't see that as a bad thing. I think it makes the language more > > flexible. > It also makes the code less predictable. The pointer dereference > example is exactly the case in point. Imagine that your program uses > a lot of third-party classes for which you don't have sources. If > some of those classes overload the operator `*', in many cases you > will have no idea what goes on behind the scenes when you code uses > those classes, and deeply-nested, multiple-inheritance hierarchies of > these classes together with insufficient documentation could prevent > you from ever finding out. It is quite possible that you will not > even be aware that `*' is overloaded, until it is too late. But, the point of this was to allow use of new datatypes that acted as old ones. So that code was reusable (in template form). > Try to write a time-critical application that way, and you will > understand what I mean. But, most programs these days are NOT time-critical. For the most part, companies that hire programmers, what software that is quick to develope and works. Speed isn't that important (else VB wouldn't be so popular). -- (\/) Endlisnis (\/) s257m AT unb DOT ca Endlisnis AT GeoCities DOT com Endlis AT nbnet DOT nb DOT ca