http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9257
[email protected] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #1 from [email protected] 2013-01-02 09:41:47 PST --- (In reply to comment #0) > operator opBinary(string op)(S rhs); //Fine > operator opBinary(string op)(S rhs1, S rhs2); //Error, wrong number of > arguments > operator opOpBinary(string op)(Type rhs); //Error, did you mean opOpAssign? > operator opcmp(Type rhs); //Error, did you mean opCmp? > static bool opEquals(S s1, S s2); //Error, opEquals cannot be declared as > static > } > //---- > > This would help with keeping in line with D's safety standard, in particular, > the override keyword. > > (from the discussion: > http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]) Thank you for opening a ER. I was too much busy to do it. I don't know if the solution proposed here is the right one, but being aware that a problem exists is the first step toward its solution. Probably a pseudo-keyword like "@operator" is more reasonable than "operator". > Also want to point out: This bug has even made it into phobos. I suggest to show here some of the lines of code that contain that bug. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
