On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 07:10:50PM +0000, via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Friday, 25 July 2014 at 18:54:15 UTC, Daniel Gibson wrote: [...] > >Well, to be fair the documentation, is pretty explicit about it, the > >headings are "Overloading == and !=" and "Overloading <, <=, <, and > ><=". > > Whatever the outcome of the discussion will be, it needs to be > documented much better. The current documentation doesn't say anything > about whether or not, and how opEquals and opCmp relate. I doesn't > even mention that they are supposed to be consistent. > > I'm just afraid that it will not be noticed, because it will be > "hidden" in the documentation. If the status quo is kept, you just > won't know you've written wrong code, even though the compiler has all > the means to tell you. > > >The D1 documentation even had a rationale why there's both opEquals > >and opCmp, no idea why that was dropped for D2. > > > >However, I read about opCmp at some time and in the meantime forgot > >about the "not for ==" part - but this is probably a problem with my > >brain (or the long timespan) and not with the documentation. > > Well, you're not the only one :-(
Yeah, we definitely need to improve the docs so that the distinction is clearer. T -- Дерево держится корнями, а человек - друзьями.
