On 06.10.2017 00:04, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I'm very much in favor of this. Also, those rewrites should be
consistently applied for all types, even built-ins (the compiler
implementation can be more complex, but the language rules would be
simplified).
One immediate benefit would be that opCmp could be reliably used for all
types that support comparison, for example 2.opCmp(3).
Another benefit would be that operators such as += can reassign class
references, for example when a value type is implemented as a unique
reference to immutable data.
Being able to do 2.opCmp(3) would be pretty cool, but I'm still convinced
that allowing for operators to be overloaded outside of the type is a
terrible idea. It's far cleaner for them to be tied to the type
It's far from clean because it enforces a certain calling convention.
- especially
when you consider that it's not possible to differentiate between
conflicting overloadeded operators.
This is just not true. D has enough mechanisms for differentiating
between conflicting overloads.
And having them declared outside of the
type just opens up all of the problems that were just being complained about
in this thread with templated code not being able to access free functions
that weren't imported in the module that it's in.
Those are UFCS issues, but I'd rather have UFCS than no UFCS.
