David A. Black wrote:

> Hi --
> 
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2009, Tim Greer wrote:
> 
>> FrihD wrote:
>>
>>> It is not an operator, but actually is the method "<<". So it
>>> depends on the object that receives this method.
>>
>> Actually, it depends on what it depends on, because it's both (either
>> or).  It's a method, or just an operator (<< left shift bitwise
>> operator), or as an append operator.  I suppose it's all in the use
>> and wording, though.
> 
> The method-ness has a certain primacy, in the sense that this:
> 
>    a << b
> 
> is always a method call; that is, it is always the same as:
> 
>    a.<<(b)
> 
> The syntactic sugar, however, has the clear purpose of making it look
> like an infix operator. I think it's an operator kind of the way
> "attributes" are attributes -- that is, mainly in the eye of the
> beholder. The language really doesn't care whether we call things
> attributes and operators, so it's all about what helps people make
> sense of it.
> 
> 
> David
> 

That's pretty much what I was saying, too. (Or trying to say).  I
personally don't care how people refer to things, provided it conveys
the intent and function.  It's all good to me.
-- 
Tim Greer, CEO/Founder/CTO, BurlyHost.com, Inc.
Shared Hosting, Reseller Hosting, Dedicated & Semi-Dedicated servers
and Custom Hosting.  24/7 support, 30 day guarantee, secure servers.
Industry's most experienced staff! -- Web Hosting With Muscle!