http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=124


clugdbug@yahoo.com.au changed:

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




------- Comment #1 from clugdbug@yahoo.com.au  2006-07-08 06:33 -------
The status of this feature is now clear: it will not be included in D 1.0.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=124


bugzilla@digitalmars.com changed:

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




------- Comment #2 from bugzilla@digitalmars.com  2006-07-08 16:29 -------
I'd prefer to leave this open as an enhancement request for 2.0. It's a great idea.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=124





------- Comment #3 from wbaxter@gmail.com  2006-10-25 02:06 -------
New url is: http://www.digitalmars.com/pnews/read.php?server=news.digitalmars.com&group=digitalmars.D&artnum=35949


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=124





------- Comment #4 from davidl@126.com  2007-06-27 22:30 -------
yah, it'a great idea. if opSubAssign_r could be automatically deduced from
opSubAssign it would be even greater.
Then opAddAssign_r would leave in compiler internal.
while the possibilities are there:

typeof(this) opSubAssign(this, oper)
opSubAssign_r would simply as following:
tyepof(this) opSubAssign_r(oper, this)
and also opDivAssign_r

any non-commutative operand would need to have this reverse op. and compiler only need to consider non-commutative situation

as we can see in common case, integer , float type , sub and div operators are not commutative.

Shall we introduce some *commutative* keyword to let the compiler know if it's okay to call the original op overloading. If not, the compiler would try to call the op_r which is deducing from op overloading.


-- 

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=124


Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> changed:

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


--- Comment #5 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> 2010-03-15 00:58:04 PDT ---
This is clearly not going to happen. Rejected.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------