https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=11525
--- Comment #4 from Kenji Hara <[email protected]> 2013-11-27 07:59:39 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > I'm not sure this is supposed to work... Structs with overloaded operators > > generally don't work with array operations. > > I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed (besides the fact that it did work up > till now). Without this complex numbers are very much 2nd class citizens for > example. This change was introduced by fixing bug 11376. (In reply to comment #3) > Yes, but unless the 2.064 behavior was intentional, this is an enhancement and > not a regression. I remember this being discussed before but I don't know > where. If an used array-op is not directly implemented in druntime, compiler will implicitly generate a function to implement the required array-op by using for-loop. So, if the array-op operand properly supports arithmetic operations (+, -, *, /, ...), corresponding array-op should also be accepted. So, this is really a regression IMO. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
