subject:"\[Issue 3659\] Too much exegesis on opEquals"

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2011-09-29 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 Walter Bright changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2011-09-09 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 Kenji Hara changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #10 from Kenji Hara 20

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2011-06-15 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 yebblies changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc --- Comment #9 from

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2011-06-12 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 --- Comment #8 from yebblies 2011-06-12 22:44:10 PDT --- *** Issue 3729 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail becaus

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2011-06-12 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 --- Comment #7 from yebblies 2011-06-12 22:44:02 PDT --- *** Issue 3607 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail becaus

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2010-12-06 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 Don changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid, spec CC|

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2010-01-20 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 Tomasz Sowiński changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tomeks...@gmail.com --- Comment #5 f

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2009-12-31 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 --- Comment #4 from Steven Schveighoffer 2009-12-31 09:45:21 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > I'm thinking of our current stance on const: if you don't care about const, > don't use it and for the most part it won't intrude on you. For examp

[Issue 3659] Too much exegesis on opEquals

2009-12-31 Thread d-bugmail

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3659 --- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu 2009-12-31 07:37:33 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) > Here is the issue. The compiler now is required to generate an opEquals which > calls x.m == y.m on all members m of the struct (this was to fix bu