subject:"\[Issue 15793\] Change \!is error to warning"

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2022-12-17 Thread d-bugmail--- via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P1 |P4 --

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-19 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 --- Comment #8 from Sobirari Muhomori --- A little comparison: in java and C# Object.Equals is provided, but not called implicitly. It's provided, but is opt-in and explicit, it's all somewhat rooted in java, C# and D just

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-18 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 Sobirari Muhomori changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||spec

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-15 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan M Davis --- > The problem is not best practices, but usability. As I said, while it's best practice to use is and !is with null, it is a bit much to treat it as an error to use == or !=.

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-15 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 --- Comment #6 from Steven Schveighoffer --- lowering != null to !is null is the right answer. I would be surprised if inlining doesn't automatically do this. But of course, the compiler rejects it, so no way to test it. --

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-15 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 --- Comment #5 from Sobirari Muhomori --- The problem is not best practices, but usability. --

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-14 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan M Davis --- At this point, comparing null objects will work just fine, since the free function opEquals that calls the member function opEquals for classes checks for null first, but if you

[Issue 15793] Change !is error to warning

2016-03-14 Thread via Digitalmars-d-bugs

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15793 --- Comment #3 from Sobirari Muhomori --- In reality I'm comparing COM interfaces. I removed the check, it was defensive anyway. That's my concern actually: such checks should be a no-brainer or it will cause very nasty