You mean this? https://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/int64 (slide 12 and
following)
This would be cool.

2017-07-14 18:03 GMT+02:00 Michał Wadas <michalwadas at gmail.com>:

> To be honest, I recommend to abandon all ideas of operator overloading for
> arbitrary types - that's extremely unlikely to happen. It's heavily affects
> optimization possibilities, requires extensive type checks. Moreover, there
> is no interest from browser vendors to implement it.
>
> However, I expect that in far future we will be able to overload operators
> if we get structs (having native complex numbers and matrices would be
> great).
>
>
> On 14 Jul 2017 3:04 pm, "Bruno Jouhier" <bjouhier at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > > No. It is a solution to a problem I have today: arithmetic on decimal
>> values.
>> > would you enjoy debugging someone else’s production-code with
>> overloaded decimal operators? or would you prefer them having the courtesy
>> to use method-calls, thus saving the headache of having to inspect every
>> arithmetic expression?
>>
>> Well, my context is business apps (accounting). Lots of developers
>> writing lots of rules doing arithmetics on decimal quantities (JS number is
>> not an option). Operators will keep the code concise, readable and familiar.
>>
>> Code will be TypeScript so there will be typing hints everywhere
>> (tooltips too) and debug-ability should not be an issue.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20170714/f2bd7395/attachment.html>

You mean this? https://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/int64 (slide 12 and
following)
This would be cool.