From: Sebastian Hungerecker <sepp2k@...>
Date: 2009-11-21T21:22:14+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby doesn't implement x++ for Fixnum's because ???

Am Donnerstag 19 November 2009 16:48:52 schrieb Aldric Giacomoni:
> http://jicksta.com/posts/superators-add-new-operators-to-ruby
> Well, with -that-, we definitely can add '++' as syntactic sugar for 
> succ.

But what good would that do except confuse people?

If x++ were equivalent to x.succ neither  x++; p x  nor  p(x++)  would behave 
as expected (were "as expected" means "like they do in other languages").

For x++ to behave as expected, it would have to be sugar for x.succ! (and 
x.succ! would have to return x's previous value), which, as has been pointed 
out, doesn't and can't exist.