On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 00:00, div0 <d...@sourceforge.net> wrote: > On 20/08/2010 21:16, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > It's legal according to TDPL. It seems to be intended to be used as a >> shorthand >> for if. So, stuff like >> >> condition&& writeln("my output"); >> >> are supposed to be perfectly legal as bizarre as that may seem. I don't >> believe >> that it would be legal to do >> >> if(condition&& writeln("my output")) >> { >> } >> >> since the result fed to if must be a bool, but a statement doesn't need to >> result in bool, so apparently you can use&& with a void function in a >> statement. It's just that the void function must be last. >> >> - Jonathan M Davis >> > > Then Andrei has taken leave of his senses and this is one situation where > DMD is corrent and TDPL is wrong. > > Half arsed, moronic shortcuts like that belong in scripting languages and > shell environements, not serious programming languages.
If Andrei is wrond and DMD is right, then the first example should not have compiled too.. > -- > My enormous talent is exceeded only by my outrageous laziness. > http://www.ssTk.co.uk > -- Ersin Er http://metasolid.com