http://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206

--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@gdcproject.org> ---
You probably want to use sadd or uadd instead.  There are around a dozen builtins like this that don't provide parameters (generic builtins).

What should be done is either to not expose them, or to provide templates such as the one you've provided to give proper access to it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206

Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@gdcproject.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@gdcproject.org> ---
To add insult to injury.

https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/GDC/pull/265

Of course, writing the generic templates ourselves can also be done in the library, and would work much more naturally with us.  However for the compiler, the answer is no.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugzilla.gdcproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206

--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@gdcproject.org> ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #2)
> 
> Of course, writing the generic templates ourselves can also be done in the library, and would work much more naturally with us.  However for the compiler, the answer is no.

But this has really been superseded by core.checkedint somewhat.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.