On Tuesday, 18 June 2013 at 10:43:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:35:06 TommiT wrote:
This must be by design, because associative arrays return
lvalue
from += operator as well:
Well, it's also the sort of thing that a lot of people screw up
even in C++ -
they make operater= return void when it should return a
reference to the
object being assigned to. So, it wouldn't entirely surprise me
if it's the way
that it is with AAs, because the person coding them up forgot
to do otherwise.
What's surprises me more is ints, but regardless of whether
it's by design by
not (and there's a decent chance that it is), I'd argue that it
was a poor
decision unless there's something that I'm missing.
In any case, I think that it's worth opening up an enhancement
request.
- Jonathan M Davis
I posted an enhancement request just get some kind of an answer
to this thing:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10428
