On 10/20/17 6:23 PM, Patrick wrote:
On Friday, 20 October 2017 at 22:15:36 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 10/20/17 5:55 PM, Patrick wrote:
Due to the very specific nature of the 'is' operator, why wouldn't
the compiler know to implicitly query the class types? Why must it be
explicitly written, typeof(this)?
The compiler generally doesn't "fix" errors for you, it tells you
there is a problem, and then you have to fix it. You have to be clear
and unambiguous to the compiler. Otherwise debugging would be hell.
Not asking the compiler to fix my errors.
When would
is(this, myClass) not mean: is(typeof(this) : typeof(myClass))?
class C
{
}
int c;
C myC;
is(myC : c);
oops, forgot to capitalize. But compiler says "I know, you really meant
is(typeof(myC) : typeof(c)) -> false.
-Steve
