Question is in the title really; I'm sure there is something logical, but for now I'm stumped!
See Question&Answers more detail:osQuestion is in the title really; I'm sure there is something logical, but for now I'm stumped!
See Question&Answers more detail:osAccording to §8.3.1 of The Design and Evolution of C++:
The idea of providing an output operator rather than a named output function was suggested by Doug McIlroy by analogy with the I/O redirection operators in the UNIX shell (>, >>, |, etc.)
[...]
Several operators were considered for input and output operations: the assignment operator was a candidate for both input and output, but it binds the wrong way. That is
cout=a=b
would be interpreted ascout=(a=b)
, and most people seemed to prefer the input operator to be different from the output operator. The operators<
and>
were tried, but the meanings "less than" and "greater than" were so firmly implanted in people's minds that the new I/O statements were for all practical purposes unreadable (this does not appear to be the case for<<
and>>
). Apart from that, '<' is just above ',' on most keyboards, and people were writing expressions like this:cout < x , y, z;
It is not easy to give good error messages for this.