On Tuesday, December 25, 2018 7:27:39 AM MST Per Nordlöw via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 at 00:32:55 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
> > No, because equality comparison between classes lowers to
> > `object.opEquals` [1], which takes both parameters as `Object`.
>
> This is
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 at 14:27:39 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
This is a severe limitation. Are there any plans on fixing this
or do I have to wait for Andrei's proposed ProtoObject?
Ignore opEquals and use your own interface.
On Tuesday, 25 December 2018 at 00:32:55 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
No, because equality comparison between classes lowers to
`object.opEquals` [1], which takes both parameters as `Object`.
This is a severe limitation. Are there any plans on fixing this
or do I have to wait for Andrei's proposed
On Monday, 24 December 2018 at 22:58:03 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
Is it in the following code possible to make the statement
assert(car1 == car2);
in the function testEqual() compile in a `@safe pure nothrow
@nogc context`?
No, because equality comparison between classes lowers to
Is it in the following code possible to make the statement
assert(car1 == car2);
in the function testEqual() compile in a `@safe pure nothrow
@nogc context`?
Code:
import core.internal.hash : hashOf;
/** Hash that distinguishes `Expr(X)` from `NounExpr(X)`.
*
* See_Also:
