Re: so what a (_:String).+ really is (as opposed to (_:String).isEmpty)
2012-04-30 19:23:37 GMT
In Java, it's built into the compiler and is given special dispensation in the language spec. The language has no support for symbolic method names or for operator overloading; except for Strings which are treated as honorary primitives for this one purpose only (there's also some fun logic involved as regards the formatting of real primitives and calling .toString on objects as part of this concatenation)
On 30 April 2012 18:58, Andy Coolware <andy.coolware-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> the phrase "taken to support" is key here. The string class doesn't
>> have a "+" method on it, the language just pretends it does.
> So this is somehow built into a compiler?
gtalk / msn : kev.lee.wright-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org