Revision as of 01:17, 11 June 2025 edit 102.91.4.155 (talk) →Separate C and C++?: Reply Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:27, 11 June 2025 edit undo 102.91.4.155 (talk) →Separate C and C++?: Reply Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply Next edit →
Line 54: :: Right, that's why it says "no" under "in C?" --[[User:131.215.155.112\|131.215.155.112]] 22:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC) :::+1:214:429:5125 (00:00)10:42, 12 December 2025 (Stephen Jasper) unsubscribe [[Special:Contributions/102.91.4.155\|102.91.4.155]] ([[User talk:102.91.4.155\|talk]]) 01:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC) : I agree, let's have different articles. Currently the article is quite a mess since C doesn't have the concept of operator overloading. If the article was split, both ''Overloadable'' and ''Prototype examples'' columns could be not included in the article about operators in C and we won't need ''Included in C'' column at all. If we had separate articles, it would be possible to better present the details of operators in each C and C++.[[User:1exec1\|1exec1]] ([[User talk:1exec1\|talk]]) 21:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Operators in C and C++: Difference between revisions