• mjm (3/3) Aug 11 2003 Please implement the overloading of the function call operator.
• Matthew Wilson (5/8) Aug 11 2003 I'm inclined to agree by (C++) instinct, but I think some example cases
• Ilya Minkov (5/8) Aug 11 2003 Won't closures also do?

mjm <mjm_member pathlink.com> writes:

Please implement the overloading of the function call operator.
Then array indexing could be a special case of that and this is also useful
elsewhere (function objects, random number generators).

"Matthew Wilson" <matthew stlsoft.org> writes:

I'm inclined to agree by (C++) instinct, but I think some example cases
would be good.

"mjm" <mjm_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bh8esq$1crg$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Please implement the overloading of the function call operator.
 Then array indexing could be a special case of that and this is also

useful
 elsewhere (function objects, random number generators).

Ilya Minkov <midiclub 8ung.at> writes:

mjm wrote:
 Please implement the overloading of the function call operator.
 Then array indexing could be a special case of that and this is also useful
 elsewhere (function objects, random number generators).

Won't closures also do?

And no, it's not good enough for array indexing, since it would be 
useful to distinguish between array element getter and setter!

-i.