On Thursday, 28 November 2013 at 13:23:22 UTC, Jonas Drewsen
wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 November 2013 at 00:46:30 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
On 11/26/13 7:00 PM, Namespace wrote:
On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 at 21:37:49 UTC, Jonas Drewsen
wrote:
Isn't it a bug that the assertion is triggered for this:
class Test3 {}
void main()
{
assert( (new Test3()) == (new Test3()) );
}
Tried it on http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/ as well.
/Jonas
Because your Test3 class has probably no own opEquals method,
your
comparison is the same as
assert( (new Test3()) is (new Test3()) );
which is obviously wrong.
See:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/blob/master/src/object_.d#L116
The ddoc for the method is wrong. It should say something like:
returns != 0 if this object has the same memory address as
obj. Subclasses may override this method to provide custom
equality comparison.
Because for the OP, Test3 has the same contents as the other
Test3 (both empty).
"does have the same contents as obj"
yes this is what confused me... and actually, it is a bit wierd
coming from a c++ background that obj1 == obj2 is the same as
(obj1 is obj2) and not per field comparison as expected (and
documented). What is the reasoning behind this... principle of
most astonishment? :)
C++ is the odd one out here, I believe. Most OO languages compare
addresses by default.
