From: Robert Klemme Date: 2005-09-30T17:26:44+09:00 Subject: Operator Overriding (Re: Operator Overloading <<) Brian Mitchell wrote: > On 9/30/05, Robert Klemme wrote: >> Austin Ziegler wrote: >>> On 9/29/05, matt.hulse@gmail.com wrote: >>>> Is there a way to overload '<<' in the Array class? >>>> >>>> Or perhaps there's a better approach to my problem. I have a class >>>> that inherits from Array. I want the user to be able to use my >>>> class just like a standard array. However, I want to be able to >>>> force some code to run every time a user of my class appends a new >>>> item. I was able to overload the '+' operator to do this but it >>>> doesn't fit with standard array usage. >>> >>> It's generally not considered a good idea to overload. Consider >>> using Delegate instead. >> >> Pardon me, but this is nonsense: Matt has *inherited* Array. Of >> course you can argue about whether *that* is reasonable, but once >> you did that providing your own implementation of a super class >> method in a derived class is completely standard OO. There's even a >> keyword to support this ("super"). >> >> If you wanted to question the practice of inheriting classes like >> Array and String then I'm completely with you. This doesn't make >> sense more often that it does. But I know too little of this >> particular case to further comment on that. >> >> Kind regards >> >> -r :-) >> > > It seems like this thread ought to consider the differences between > overloading and overriding. They are most certainly not the same. True. We used the wrong term. But if I'm not mistaken everybody was actually talking about overriding so far - even if they used the wrong word. Thanks for reminding us! Kind regards robert