On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 12:53:24 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 12:49:38 UTC, bearophile wrote:
This is something that has come out of a thread I have opened
in D.learn.
In the thread qznc has answered me:
Operator precedence of "." is higher than unary minus.
That's right:
double foo(in double x) {
assert (x >= 0);
return x;
}
void main() {
assert(-1.foo == -1);
}
Is this a good design of the operator precedences? Is this
worth changing/fixing?
Bye,
bearophile
From my POV this is good design. When I see:
assert(-1.foo == -1);
Is same for me as:
assert(-foo(1) == -1);
If I saw this, I would have to test it to be sure.. I feel it's
in the same area as several post/pre increment/decrement in the
same line.
