On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 11:42:47AM -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > On 4/28/2012 11:10 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >But the overload of 'is' as an operator with 'is()' as an expression > >(and its various ugly arbitrarily assigned syntaxes)? WAT. > > It's not that unusual for an operator to have a binary form that is > totally different from its unary form. Like *
So the 'is' in 'is()' is an _operator_? WAT? That's like saying the 'f' in 'f(1,2,3)' is an operator. I thought it was the '(1,2,3)' that was the operator that calls the function f. > >Seriously, one of the first things I'd like to see in D3 is a > >complete overhaul of is(). I say again, the various *semantics* of it > >are extremely useful, and are part of what makes D rock so much. But > >the *syntax* badly needs a total redesign. We need much saner syntax > >assigned to each of the current uses of is(), that doesn't look like > >it was grafted in from a PHP development branch. > > I agree that the IsExpression syntax is a bit of a disaster. > Eventually we can redesign it (D3), but there's no way we have time to > do that now. I'm not suggesting that we do that now. :-) But it *is* a disaster, and when the time comes for D3, whenever that may be, it definitely needs an overhaul. T -- Life is too short to run proprietary software. -- Bdale Garbee
