http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7177
--- Comment #39 from Steven Schveighoffer <[email protected]> 2013-03-22 08:33:31 PDT --- (In reply to comment #37) > I think that having opDollar work with UFCS would set a bad precedent. That's > opening the door for 3rd party code to be able to overload operators on your > types, and I think that that's a pretty bad can of worms to open. This can already be done with a wrapping type and alias this. See my earlier example. However, we can probably make opDollar a special case, it's not really an operator but a special symbol that $ gets translated into. I don't think it would be inconsistent to allow UFCS opDollar and not allow other operators via UFCS. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
