http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3188
--- Comment #6 from Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> 2009-07-25 05:03:46 PDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) >> In the same way, the existence of opIndexAssign does nothing >> whatsoever to prevent the compiler from expanding it to something >> else instead if the type in question has no opIndexAssign. > > What else could it be? The opIndex with ref return already being talked about, of course. > But properties are not operators. If opIndexAssign must exist, > then why doesn't, for example, opStarAssign also exist? To be honest, I'm not sure either. Aside from the fact that "star" doesn't describe the semantics of any D operator, at least it would enable bit pointers that use the same notation as normal pointers. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------