Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c++:12139 comp.std.c++:718
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!microsoft!jimad
From: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.std.c++
Subject: Re: distinguishing operator[] on left and right
Message-ID: <71122@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 7 Mar 91 19:55:56 GMT
References: <1991Feb28.212419.20920@ndl.com> <1991Mar2.000705.3496@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <1991Mar2.212017.13885@world.std.com>
Reply-To: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 12

In article <1991Mar2.212017.13885@world.std.com> wmm@world.std.com (William M Miller) writes:
|Another major consideration X3J16 applies to proposals is if there is a
|straightforward way to achieve the desired results in the existing language.
|As someone pointed out in an earlier posting, making operator[]() return an
|object of an auxiliary class with separate operator=() and conversion
|operator member functions is a pretty reasonable way to address this problem
|where it's needed, and it's more generally applicable, as well.

.... assuming that the committee accepts overloaded operator dot.  Otherwise,
as Cay has pointed out, making operator[] return an auxiliary class
[ dare we call it a "reference" class ??? ] is not a general solution,
since it cannot be dereferenced like a normal object.