On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 at 19:34:15 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I don't know if there is any struct-specific problem here, but AA comparison right now is horribly horribly broken (search on the bug tracker for "AA" and you'll see a bunch of issues on that end). You're incredibly lucky that two AA literals actually compared equal. In some cases, not even that is guaranteed.
Yeah, I was a little aware that AAs were semi-broken, but I thought, hey, if it seems to work then it obviously works.
Turns out that wasn't so true. :\
I've tried to clean up the AA code but it's a tangled messy ugly labyrinth with fragile hacks sprinkled in, and didn't get to the point where it's ready to commit. One major obstacle is that parts of it are implemented in compiler hacks, and part of it is schizophrenically duplicated in object_.d, not necessarily consistently, and it's just Not Nice in general. That it works at all is reason enough to be thankful. I don't expect things to be pretty once you start poking into the intricacies of AA's, sad to say.
Yeah, the trouble is, none of the set-based data types (including maps) in D seem to be working...
- AAs are broken - AssociativeArray is the same as above, I think? - RedBlackTree is useless (how do I keep a "set of sets"?) etc. So you can't really write a real program in D, to put it blunty.
