On 09/12/2011 04:10 PM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 00:11:11 +0200, Timon Gehr <timon.g...@gmx.ch> wrote:
I think the fact that "in" for AAs returns a pointer is a mistake and
ugly in the first place and any generic code that relies on any
container to return a raw internal pointer is flawed by itself imho.
If D had a Nullable struct, that would likely be a much better return
type for 'in'. The thing is, we do have a nullable!T type: T*.
This is simply a case of having a wrench and needing a hammer.
This is a case of having a wrench, needing a hammer, finding a
screwdriver and perform some surgery on it so that it can be used as
both a screwdriver and a hammer.
'in' is a boolean predicate, except in D.
