Re: opCmp and opEquals woes

[Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d]

"Jonathan M Davis"  wrote in message 
news:lzigfacgrlssjuemo...@forum.dlang.org...

The compiler _never_ defines opCmp for you. You have to do that yourself. 
So, what you're suggesting would force people to define opEquals just 
because they defined opCmp unless they wanted to take a performance hit 
<<<<<<<< in the rare case that it actually matters >>>>>>>>>>.
And once you define opEquals, you have to define toHash. So, what you're 
suggesting would force a lot more code to define toHash, which will likely 
cause far more bugs than simply requiring that the programmer define 
opEquals if that's required in order to make it consistent with opEquals.