Over-complicated just for fun?

[LB]

I found this line in an old project of mine:

//...
cur = Nit->operator->()->second; //(*Nit)->second didn't seem fun enough
//... 

Anyone else enjoy doing things the more complicated way?

[3hM2Nwbp]

Yes, but only when contributing to open source projects. It helps to blend in with the rest of the team.

[Catfish2]

Anyone else enjoy doing things the more complicated way?

Stroustrup!

In your code, what does Nit::operator() do?

[LB]

It gives a syntax error, because Nit isn't a class ;)

[zb0S216C]

LB wrote:

"Anyone else enjoy doing things the more complicated way?"

Yes. I'm planning on building a very, very simple kernel. Before I start working on it, I'm developing a new, private, language for its implementation, instead of using an existing language. I just enjoy making seemingly simple tasks more complicated for myself, because I learn from my experiences. Besides, it's no fun when things are simplified.

_Wazzak

[Cheraphy]

I'm planning on building a very, very simple kernel.

seemingly simple tasks

Qualifying kernel with the adjective simple does not make building one a seemingly simple task xD


I wrote a Rube-Goldberg routine in an esoteric language that ultimately was just an incrementer. I'll look for the code later

[Catfish2]

It gives a syntax error, because Nit isn't a class ;)

Ha. Ha. Ha.
Come on! I was asking how/if you defined that operator. :P

[LB]

You can't overload the scope resolution operator :p