On Monday, May 14, 2012 02:53:20 Alex Rønne Petersen wrote: > Hi, > > Would anyone be terribly angry if equals_t was deprecated and later > removed? I sent a patch a while back to add a compare_t type for > consistency, but the consensus ended up being that it'd be better to get > rid of equals_t.
I definitely think that it should be killed. It's ludicrous for a function whose result is boolean to ever return anything other than bool. If it wer returning something which was _convertible_ to bool but had other uses (e.g. in), then that would be different, but that's not the case with opEquals at all. equals_t is not mentioned in TDPL (rather, TDPL specifically lists opEquals as returning bool), and I see _zero_ value in having bool at this point. As I understand it, it was created purely for transitional purposes (since D1 made the mistake of having opEquals return int), and I really don't think that that's necessary or particularly helpful at this point. - Jonathan M Davis