On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 05:16:35 UTC, Chris Cain wrote:
Actually, I'm going to strengthen this a bit more. I'd _still_ think it's a good idea to keep structs the way they are. I expect (as I think many would) structs to be very bare metal. Very little auto-magic should touch them because they are used so often for low-level tasks and you really ought to be very precise when you're defining them and their behavior. In that context, "==" being the same as "is" makes sense from my perspective and I wouldn't expect anything else unless I explicitly told it otherwise.
I don't feel strongly about which path is right. But (as Mehrdad has shown) the current behaviour is not consistent either way: strings are compared bitwise, floats are compared logically.
