> I think it's still better than what you get with C++ and Python. I would much rather have a relatively inscrutable <+> operator that does something vaguely li

> I think it's still better than what you get with C++ and Python. I would much rather have a relatively inscrutable <+> operator that does something vaguely like addition than having + do multiple completely different things on different types. I can live with + as a concatenation operator for strings, but in general, if you're starting to implement custom operators for +, you should only do this for things which are numbers, and which can also support -, / and *. Wrt to Arrow, you could still have your custom operator but with a human-readable name: actionA >next> some complicated action >next> actionB or alternatively: actionA `next` some complicated action `next` actionB Sure, it's a bit more verbose, but it makes for more readable code (IMO). I think it's not so much the notion of custom operators I object to than the "let's get wild with non-AZERTY characters" philosophy. Of course, it doesn't mean that human-readable names are always better... I'm looking at you, "return".