On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Pelle Månsson <[email protected]> wrote: > Bill Baxter wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Michel Fortin >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 2009-10-27 09:07:06 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu >>> <[email protected]> said: >>> >>>> My current thought is to ascribe lhs ~ rhs the same type as lhs (thereby >>>> making ~ consistent with ~= by making lhs ~= rhs same as lhs = lhs ~ >>>> rhs) in >>>> case lhs is a string type. If lhs is a character type, the result type >>>> is >>>> obviously the same as rhs. >>> >>> Seems the most intuitive option to me. Also, it makes "a ~= b" equivalent >>> to >>> "a = a ~ b" which is always nice. >> >> And that kind of suggests to me that even a = b should work. >> It has many of the same characteristics as ~=. It's pretty >> unambiguous what you'd expect to happen if not an error. >> >> >> --bb > > int a; > float b = 2.1; > a = b; > also unambiguous?
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but wstring <-> string <-> dstring are all lossless conversions. That isn't the case with int and float. --bb
