http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7177
--- Comment #49 from Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> 2013-03-24 14:51:44 PDT --- > I apologize, but this isn't clear to me. I understand the what/why of the > goal, > but I don't understand the how? Is it the compiler that is translating $ to > length? Yes. >Then if so, how does "hasLength!T" come into play? Whenever I wrote "hasLength!T" I meant "The expression (expr).length exists for expr of type T". > Or are we doing this "via" the compiler as a workaround until we can implement > opDollar as non-member? (since you mentioned the possibility of allowing > non-member operators) I'm thinking of putting this decision in the compiler for now, it's the least committal change. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
