Re: WAT: opCmp and opEquals woes

[w0rp via Digitalmars-d]

I wonder. If opCmp is supposed to imply partial ordering, then 
that means opCmp should imply the antisymmetric property of 
partial ordering. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PartialOrder.html

a <= b and b <= a implies a = b.
That would mean for us that opEquals being generated with opCmp 
== 0 would make sense.

Without that transitive property, it would imply only that it was 
a preorder, but not a partial order. 
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Preorder.html