> Operator overloading seems to be highly encouraged, and library authors go to town with it. This, the "every single library needs to provide some clever DSL"

> Operator overloading seems to be highly encouraged, and library authors go to town with it. This, the "every single library needs to provide some clever DSL", is my major complaint with Scala. It's not really Scala's fault either, Scala's core libraries don't have this problem. It's 3rd party developers with no restraint. So it doesn't have to be this way and I think (or hope, based on some comments about Scala on this site previously) that it's beginning to become a discouraged practice. Still, I have an immediate, visceral reaction to it after the years I spent trying to untangle heaps of overly clever C++ code with the same kinds of issues. I never want to be in that situation again. Code should be, above all, easy to read. If your code looks like a different language depending on which library you're using, that's a real negative. At least we now have pretty good IDEs that help out, but even then I think that it's probably not be a good sign if you kind of need to have a good IDE to understand the code.