• Jonathan Crapuchettes (3/3) May 30 2007 I do a lot of matrix calculations with a D library that I have written a...
• Johan Granberg (3/7) May 30 2007 What is preventing you from doing so now? if opIndex returns a type that
• Frits van Bommel (5/14) May 30 2007 Typically, if you have a matrix of T you'd want to have mat[i,j] (or
• Johan Granberg (3/19) May 30 2007 But if T supports both opIndex and opAssign that wouldn't be a problem,
• Frits van Bommel (10/29) May 30 2007 (Presumably you mean opAddAssign instead of opIndex?)

Jonathan Crapuchettes <jcrapuchettes gmail.com> writes:

I do a lot of matrix calculations with a D library that I have written and it
would be really nice to be able to overload a few more array operators, like
assigned multiplication (i.e. mat1[i,j] += mat2[i,j];).  Has this feature been
approved, discussed, or planned?
Thanks,
JC

Johan Granberg <lijat.meREM OVEgmail.com> writes:

Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:

 I do a lot of matrix calculations with a D library that I have written and
 it would be really nice to be able to overload a few more array operators,
 like assigned multiplication (i.e. mat1[i,j] += mat2[i,j];).  Has this
 feature been approved, discussed, or planned? Thanks, JC

What is preventing you from doing so now? if opIndex returns a type that
overloads opAddAssign your example should be possible right now.

Frits van Bommel <fvbommel REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> writes:

Johan Granberg wrote:
 Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:
 
 I do a lot of matrix calculations with a D library that I have written and
 it would be really nice to be able to overload a few more array operators,
 like assigned multiplication (i.e. mat1[i,j] += mat2[i,j];).  Has this
 feature been approved, discussed, or planned? Thanks, JC

 
 What is preventing you from doing so now? if opIndex returns a type that
 overloads opAddAssign your example should be possible right now.

Typically, if you have a matrix of T you'd want to have mat[i,j] (or 
mat[i][j]) return either a T or something that implicitly converts to 
one. Since you can only overload operators on aggregates (class, struct, 
union) but can't define implicit conversions for them...

Johan Granberg <lijat.meREM OVEgmail.com> writes:

Frits van Bommel wrote:

 Johan Granberg wrote:
 Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:
 
 I do a lot of matrix calculations with a D library that I have written
 and it would be really nice to be able to overload a few more array
 operators,
 like assigned multiplication (i.e. mat1[i,j] += mat2[i,j];).  Has this
 feature been approved, discussed, or planned? Thanks, JC

 
 What is preventing you from doing so now? if opIndex returns a type that
 overloads opAddAssign your example should be possible right now.

 
 Typically, if you have a matrix of T you'd want to have mat[i,j] (or
 mat[i][j]) return either a T or something that implicitly converts to
 one. Since you can only overload operators on aggregates (class, struct,
 union) but can't define implicit conversions for them...

But if T supports both opIndex and opAssign that wouldn't be a problem,
right?

Frits van Bommel <fvbommel REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> writes:

Johan Granberg wrote:
 Frits van Bommel wrote:
 
 Johan Granberg wrote:
 Jonathan Crapuchettes wrote:

 I do a lot of matrix calculations with a D library that I have written
 and it would be really nice to be able to overload a few more array
 operators,
 like assigned multiplication (i.e. mat1[i,j] += mat2[i,j];).  Has this
 feature been approved, discussed, or planned? Thanks, JC

 What is preventing you from doing so now? if opIndex returns a type that
 overloads opAddAssign your example should be possible right now.

 Typically, if you have a matrix of T you'd want to have mat[i,j] (or
 mat[i][j]) return either a T or something that implicitly converts to
 one. Since you can only overload operators on aggregates (class, struct,
 union) but can't define implicit conversions for them...

 
 But if T supports both opIndex and opAssign that wouldn't be a problem,
 right?

(Presumably you mean opAddAssign instead of opIndex?)

Only if T is a struct or union[1], and its author was aware of the need 
to put it in that particular Matrix implementation (or you're willing to 
modify it to fit[2]).
If it's a primitive type like (int, float, cfloat) and variants, or a 
class (hint: opAssign can't modify the reference) you're screwed.


[1]: Requirements: value type with possibility of operator overloading.
[2]: Hopefully by way of a mixin, since there's a lot of op<X>Assign 
operators.