从技术上讲，每一种编程语言都有运算符重载，可以处理不同类型的数字，例如整数和实数。解释:术语重载意味着一个函数有多个实现。在大多数编程语言中，为运算符+提供了不同的实现，一个用于整数，一个用于实数，这被称为运算符重载。

Now, many people find it strange that Java has operator overloading for the operator + for adding strings together, and from a mathematical standpoint this would be strange indeed, but seen from a programming language's developer's standpoint, there is nothing wrong with adding builtin operator overloading for the operator + for other classes e.g. String. However, most people agree that once you add builtin overloading for + for String, then it is generally a good idea to provide this functionality for the developer as well.

我完全不同意操作符重载会混淆代码的谬论，因为这是由开发人员决定的。这是naïve的想法，老实说，它已经过时了。

+1用于在Java 8中添加操作符重载。

Saying that operator overloading leads to logical errors of type that operator does not match the operation logic, it's like saying nothing. The same type of error will occur if function name is inappropriate for operation logic - so what's the solution: drop the ability of function usage!? This is a comical answer - "Inappropriate for operation logic", every parameter name, every class, function or whatever can be logicly inappropriate. I think that this option should be available in respectable programing language, and those that think that it's unsafe - hey no bothy says you have to use it. Lets take the C#. They drooped the pointers but hey - there is 'unsafe code' statement - program as you like on your own risk.

我认为人们在做决定时忘记了复杂的值、矩阵代数、集合论和其他情况，因为重载可以使用标准的符号，而不用把所有东西都构建到语言中。无论如何，只有面向数学的软件才能真正受益于这些特性。一般的客户应用程序几乎不需要它们。

当程序员定义一些特定于程序的操作符时，这些关于不必要混淆的参数显然是有效的，而这些操作符可能是函数。函数名在清晰可见时，提供了函数名存在的提示。运算符是一个没有可读名称的函数。

Java通常是按照这样的理念设计的:一些额外的冗长并不是坏事，因为它使代码更具可读性。具有相同功能的构造只需输入更少的代码，过去被称为“语法糖”。这与Python的哲学非常不同，例如，在Python哲学中，更短的几乎总是被视为更好的，即使为第二个读者提供的上下文更少。

从技术上讲，每一种编程语言都有运算符重载，可以处理不同类型的数字，例如整数和实数。解释:术语重载意味着一个函数有多个实现。在大多数编程语言中，为运算符+提供了不同的实现，一个用于整数，一个用于实数，这被称为运算符重载。

Now, many people find it strange that Java has operator overloading for the operator + for adding strings together, and from a mathematical standpoint this would be strange indeed, but seen from a programming language's developer's standpoint, there is nothing wrong with adding builtin operator overloading for the operator + for other classes e.g. String. However, most people agree that once you add builtin overloading for + for String, then it is generally a good idea to provide this functionality for the developer as well.

我完全不同意操作符重载会混淆代码的谬论，因为这是由开发人员决定的。这是naïve的想法，老实说，它已经过时了。

+1用于在Java 8中添加操作符重载。

James Gosling把设计Java比作:

"There's this principle about moving, when you move from one apartment to another apartment. An interesting experiment is to pack up your apartment and put everything in boxes, then move into the next apartment and not unpack anything until you need it. So you're making your first meal, and you're pulling something out of a box. Then after a month or so you've used that to pretty much figure out what things in your life you actually need, and then you take the rest of the stuff -- forget how much you like it or how cool it is -- and you just throw it away. It's amazing how that simplifies your life, and you can use that principle in all kinds of design issues: not do things just because they're cool or just because they're interesting."

你可以在这里阅读引用的上下文

基本上，运算符重载对于对点、货币或复数建模的类非常有用。但在那之后你很快就会用光例子。

另一个因素是开发人员在c++中滥用了这个特性，重载了'&&'、'||'、强制转换操作符，当然还有'new'。将此与传递值和异常相结合所产生的复杂性在《例外c++》一书中有详细介绍。

你可能真的会搬起石头砸自己的脚。这就像指针一样，人们会犯愚蠢的错误，所以我们决定把剪刀拿走。

至少我认为这是原因。 反正我是站在你这边的。：）