hmiller@osiris (Harry Miller) writes:

>850347s@aucs.acadiau.ca (Hume Smith) writes:

>>no offense, but "simple things get operators, complicated things
>>get functions" seems like C and Fortran thinking.

>Hey, keep flaming away.  The more you do, the more I (may) learn something,
>and beat you out of that $150,000 job :-) :-).  Well, probably not, but
>it's worth a laugh or two.

more likely probably not since i just started C++ this term too.  no k$150
job here.  (anyone got one they're willing to give me?)

hmiller@osiris (Harry Miller) writes:

> IMHO, solving linear eqautions needs a distinct function call since it is
> a very special matrix operation.  C++ operators should be defined for basic
> operations, the more complex operations should use function calls.
>
> I'm new to C++, so forgive me if my opinion does not conform to the
> average though.  But I'm not much of a conformist anyway.
>
>
> Harry E. Miller ----------------- just a jerk lurking on the net
> hmiller@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu ----- where to send the hate mail

Don't worry.  Conformist or not, I agree with you.

- Nicole

---------------------------------------------------------------------
nicted@toz.buffalo.ny.us (Nicole Tedesco)
-- Change this!

In article <22188@prometheus.megatest.UUCP> djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones) writes:
>I've got a micro-nit to pick. In almost every C++ book there is
>an example "string" class. It almost always has an operator+ defined
>which is an alias for "concat". WRONGO, Algebra Breath!
>
>The concatenation operator should properly be '*', not '+', because
> ...
>It is possible to formulate an algebra over the sets of strings for which
>a remarkable number of familiar algebraic identities hold. (I taught a course
>in formal language-theory a couple of times at Ohio University which
>used this stuff as its basis.)
>
>Make the following definitions:
>
>1. 0 denotes the empty set.
>
>2. 1 denotes the set whose only member is the null string.
> ...

Sorry, but your reasoning is highly irrelevant because you are
jumping from a "string" class to a "set of strings" class at the
very beginning.  I can imagine cases in which one could be interested
in defining such a set class, but the need for a string class is certainly
by some orders of magnitude more common.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't smell rotten -- avoid a "look and smell" litigation from
Apple Computer.

Markku Sakkinen (sakkinen@jytko.jyu.fi)
       SAKKINEN@FINJYU.bitnet (alternative network address)
Department of Computer Science and Information Systems
University of Jyvaskyla (a's with umlauts)
PL 35
SF-40351 Jyvaskyla (umlauts again)
Finland
----------------------------------------------------------------------

850347s@aucs.acadiau.ca (Hume Smith) writes:

>hmiller@osiris (Harry Miller) writes:

>>IMHO, solving linear eqautions needs a distinct function call since it is
>>a very special matrix operation.  C++ operators should be defined for basic
>>operations, the more complex operations should use function calls.

>solving a system isn't really any more special than multiplying
>two matrices, IMO.  it's complicated, and you may want to have a
>few support functions (LU decomp or whatever method you use), but
>it seems to me a nice abstraction to label the whole process /.

>no offense, but "simple things get operators, complicated things
>get functions" seems like C and Fortran thinking.

No offense taken, I'm a layed back beginning C++ programmer!  Actually it's
probably because I'm to stupid to take offense (I don't know where to take
it to!) :-).

I just started learning C++ at the beginning of this semester, so my IMHOs
are not based on much real experience.  I am a C programmer and sometimes
a Fortran programmer (though I try to hide that fact), so my programming
paradigms (big word, cheap thought) are based on C programming experience,
not C++ experience.

Hey, keep flaming away.  The more you do, the more I (may) learn something,
and beat you out of that $150,000 job :-) :-).  Well, probably not, but
it's worth a laugh or two.


Harry E. Miller ----------------- just a jerk lurking on the net
hmiller@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu ----- where to send the hate mail