DMD 0.149 release

[Georg Wrede]

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> "Georg Wrede" <georg.wrede at nospam.org> wrote in message 
> news:440E1336.3050608 at nospam.org...
> 
>>BTW, what does "Implicit casts of non-bool to bool disallowed" mean?
> 
> It means you can no longer write
> 
> bool x = 5; 

Shhhhhttt! Good-bye C/C++ folks!

It's not like anybody would want to write exactly

     bool x = 5;

but more like

     bool x = strcmp("foo", "bar");
     if (!x) { /* do stuff */ }        // match
     else { /* call the cops! */ }     // no match

which, incidentally, is one of the more profound proposititions in any 
C-derived language.

The Old School Boolean C Logic was a perfectly functioning Concept. This 
fact _alone_ was the reason "Bool" took so long to be "formally" 
introduced into either C or C++. No regular programmer ever needed Prude 
Bool, only the Superior Theoreticians Thought it Wise to force this upon 
the language. It was profoundly useful as-is, and didn't need any 
pimping. A language that purports to be "to-the-metal" just has to take 
into consideration the fundamentals of [digital] life. And processor 
physics. (Wanna abstract away that? Then go to Java or whatever.)

The other night [in the D newsgroup, when it was getting hilarious] it 
dawned to me, that quite [too] many of the vocatious NG-members never 
had read their Boolean IT Fundamentals.

Good Grief: "there's just too many instances in history where the 
illiterati have dictated the outcome of otherwise intellectual 
confrontations". Damn!!

The ramifications of this (minor looking) modification are grave, I'm 
afraid.

Now what happens to

     if (stcmp("foo", "bar")) {}

???