Walter Bright Wrote:
> Jason House wrote:
> > When considering the standard library changes, I realized that
> > object.d could change. I believe a pure opCmp or toString could break
> > user code with impure versions of those functions. Would that kind of
> > a change to object.d cause any real problems for D2 users?
>
> As Andrei pointed out, the trouble with making the Object functions pure
> is if you want to do an override that caches its value.
If you have:
class A {
invariant final pure bool opEquals(invariant(Object) other) { ... }
}
int main() {
auto a = cast(invariant) new A();
auto b = cast(invariant) new A();
if(a1 == a2) { return 0; } else { return 1; }
}
... will the compiler optimize it? Since A.opEquals() is final, there's no
polymorphism, so it should be able to, but I don't know about the
implementation.
