On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 17:32:07 Daniel Murphy wrote: > "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.306.1329166430.20196.digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com... > > > Ideally perhaps, but I expect that that's not true, because operator > > overloading is done via lowering. > > > > foo() ~ bar() > > > > would become > > > > opBinary!"~"(foo(), bar()); > > While your point is still correct, this will generally be lowered to > > foo().opBinary!"~"(bar()) > > or > > bar().opBinaryRight!"~"(foo()) > > Both of which do have a defined order of evaluation.
Ah, good point. - Jonathan M Davis
