DMD 0.148 release

[Ivan Senji]

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Well, then we could skip the logical operators, right? No more && or ||. 
> Since all booleans would be strictly 0 or 1, they'd become obsolete.

What? Did you here this correctly? You are saying remove logical 
operators (the operators working on booleans in theory)?

How would they become obsolete? They would get a meaning with true booleans.

I must say that i don't have a clue what is the result of 17 && 301?
But I do know that true && true == true.

> 
> And if booleans have to only be 0 or 1, then a whole lot of unnecessary 
> conversions would be happening all over the place. Forget D speed.

No they don't. They can be anything they wan't to be. But the compiler 
should hide that from me and convince me I live in a world of Boolean 
algebra.

> 
> Also, D is supposed to be a _systems_language_ for chrissake! Any kernel 
> writing would then have to forgo booleans totally.

No.

> 
> I'm all for features in D that enhance productivity, but deliberately 
> dumbing down the language is getting a bit too far.

Making it typesafe and consisten with mathematical definitions of bools 
is dumbing? I somehow don't see why?

> 
> ---
> 
> We've all had our fights with C, C++, and other related languages. But 
> honestly, how many of us can confess to having problems with logical 
> values?

I have problems with bools. I can't sleep at night if they are ints ;)