On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 11:25:01 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > On 3/30/15 1:42 AM, ketmar wrote: >> it's still working. moreover, it is used in Phobos! and yet it's not >> documented anywhere. what i want to know is whether they will be >> removed for good, or brought back and properly documented? the current >> situation is awful: compiler has special treatment for some aggregate >> members, but nothing in documentation tells you that. >> >> > They technically can be removed for good, because an operator template > can now be an alias (this was pretty recent, maybe 1 year ago?). There > is still one thing that doesn't work right I think -- covariance. > > But doing so would break all code that uses it. I think at the very > least, Phobos should replace all D1-style operators with D2 style. > Dogfooding and all. Originally when the "yay, look at these new > template-style operators" was posted, it was imagined that one could do: > > mixin(generateD2Operators); > > in your aggregate, and the links from the new style operators to the old > style would give you an upgrade path without having to rewrite all your > operators. This really wasn't possible until the alias update. But maybe > it's time to add this to std.typecons. > > I think at the very least we should provide a link to the D1 > documentation and say that "D1 operators overloads are still supported, > but their support is not guaranteed to continue, please use D2 operators > wherever possible." > > Clearly, there is some work that should be done. I agree that if you > come across old code, and you are unaware of the old style operators, > you will be super-confused as to how the operators are even working. > That can be very annoying. > > I'll put in a doc PR to reference the D1 documentation. > > -Steve
i actually replaced that with D2 opovers in Phobos, and it passes unittests, so i can create ER in bugzilla with patch for someone to turn it into PR.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
