On Wednesday, 20 March 2013 at 02:54:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 03:48:38 Dan wrote:
On Wednesday, 20 March 2013 at 02:03:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> We already get this. That's what == does by default. It's
> just
> that it uses ==
> on each member, so if == doesn't work for a particular member
> variable and the
> semantics you want for == on the type it's in, you need to
> override opEquals.
Really?
string is one most people would like == to just work for. This
writes true then false. This certainly takes getting used to.
It
alone is a good reason for the mixins and potentially a
non-member instancesDeepEqual.
import std.stdio;
struct S {
string s;
}
void main() {
writeln("foo" == "foo".idup);
writeln(S("foo") == S("foo".idup));
}
That's a bug:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3789
From Feb 2010. Maybe by now it is so understood how it works that
at some point fixing it could be a problem. For some the language
is better defined by how the compiler treats your code than what
is listed in bugzilla. Even in looking through the history of
that bug I could not find any definitive - some say its a bug,
others say its not. You refer to TDPL which is a good source but
if it is not viewed as a bug by Walter...
