On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 at 13:59:19 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 at 13:22:35 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
Sorry, I accidentally posted the above message and I don't
know how to erase it.
You can't, this is a mailing list not a forum.
The following post is the complete one:
Given the following code:
int[] arr = [1, 2, 9, 4, 10, 6];
auto r = sort(arr);
if(is(typeof(r) == SortedRange!(int[], "a<b")))
writeln("first if");
if(is(typeof(r) == SortedRange!(int[], "a < b")))
writeln("second if");
The program outputs only "second if". I assumed that it should
have printed both
ifs. Is this a bug?
equality of lambdas are fickle. String lambdas are comparable,
because strings are comparable. Comparison of
`(args){...body...}` or `() => expression` lambdas don't work
at all in template expressions.
`SortedRange!(int[], "a<b") == SortedRange!(int[], "a < b")` is
false because the arguments to the templates differ i.e. "a<b"
!= "a < b".
Is this a bug? no. is it weird, confusing and unintuitive? yes.
I think that lambda comparison should be done logically (by that
I mean: what the function actually computes) not literally. For
example: it is a mistake to consider the 2 two lambda functions
different just because one expression has more white spaces. Also
"a < b" is the same lambda function as "e < d"; considering these
2 functions to not be equal is a mistake.
