DMD 0.148 release

[Ivan Senji]

Kyle Furlong wrote:
> Oskar Linde wrote:
> 
>> Tom skrev:
>>
>>> In article <du002m$2pnp$1 at digitaldaemon.com>, Ivan Senji says...
>>>
>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Ivan Senji" <ivan.senji_REMOVE_ at _THIS__gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> The problem in all these bool wars so far is I never saw an argument 
>>>> that would be against true booleans (while(BooleanExpression) and 
>>>> all that...).
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, PLEASE, WHY?? Just ONE argument against pure bools, only one and 
>>> I shut my
>>> mouth forever!
>>>
>>> Tom;
>>
>>
>> Does pure booleans necessarily mean that other types could not be 
>> implicitly convertible to bool? I would love "pure" booleans (not a 
>> numeric type, not allowed in arithmetic operations), but I would hate 
>> to have to write:
>>
>> if (a !is null || b !is null)
>>
>> instead of:
>>
>> if (a || b)
>>
> 
> I would say that the second construct is much less reliable, 
> maintainable, and safe than the first. Therefore, the type system should 
> disallow the second with a pure boolean type.

Ah, you can't explain that to a nonbeliever. :)