namespace first
{
public class index
{
int count;
public index()
{
count = 0;
}
public static index operator++(index x)
{
x.count++;
return count;
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
index i = new index();
i++;

Console.WriteLine(i);
}
}
}


when i am typing this program i got the error like.
first.index.operator++(first.index):not all code paths return a value;

Operator overloading is the least useful thing in C#, the operators are not any different than method calls, it is just good for mathematic obsessive people who like to use smybols rather than words to feel special as they are not valued when they go to techno bar to catch some chicks.

The return type of this function is of type 'index'. But you return an integer type. This fucntion should be written as

Operator overloads sure have their use. I don't see why you want to overload the C# ++ operator! It is there for your use! So use it as such, don't get fancy because you like to do it.
An index can easely be incremented with ++. Einstein once said: keep it simple, not simpler.

>keep it simple, not simpler.

that is what i told Scott just yesterday night

Einstein and i must think in paralel

But back to topic, even the + operator in math can be used with the Add name as a method. at compiler level each operator and function does the same thing. it is just for us, representation of that functionality is what changes.

what would you lose if you instead of int a = b + c use int a = Math.Add(b,c) ?

Serkan:
I think a=b+c is faster than a = Math.Add(b,c).
But for example the string class overloads the + operator to perform string concatenation. You could also use the Concat method for this, but a simple + is IMHO simpler. If you look in the produced IL code you would see that this + is translated into Concat by the C# compiler Let the compiler worry about the gory details, that way you don't have to do that.
But you are right, most of the time we don't need operator overloading.

i got what you mean, what i say is that "+" is a paradigm that we use for addition, to enable polimorphysm for addition they have the same operator concat strings when the type is string. It is our brain what makes the abstraction here, so instead of associating addition or concatenation with + sign, we could do it with a word "Add". the only problem would be of what data structure would this Add be part of. + does not belong to any class since it is an operator whereas Add is implemented inside different classes.

In addition to what danny said calling Math.Add() pushes another call on the stack where as a=b+c does not

Math.Add ??? Exists in Math class??! The answer shouldn't be to use it or not to use it.
Regardless this small operation in sometimes I shouldn't do that. Try we log error\exceptions
I can't permit developers team to do that
BUT, They must have method logs the error
Centralize operations important.

Again, regardless small adding operation mentioned above.

He Ramy thanks for pointing out that Math.Add luckily does not exist...