Revised RFC on range design for D2

[Bill Baxter]

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Bill Baxter <wbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Sergey Gromov <snake.scaly at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:03:42 -0500,
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Yah, overloaded ops are due for an overhaul. I'm almost afraid to ask...
>>> any ideas? :o)
>>>
>>> One goal is to fix opIndexAssign and make it work similar to the way it
>>> works in arrays, e.g. a[b] += c. Indexing into hash tables is a good
>>> test bed.
>>
>> What's wrong with a.opIndexAssign(b, a.opIndex(b) + c)?
>>
>
> Indeed.  I thought there wasn't a lot of debate needed on this, just action.

... except these extras do have the same issue that plain property
assignment does.  They would open up a new class of things that are
valid code but don't behave as expected.  writefln += 5.

And also, a[b] += c should probably be rewritten as  "a.opIndex(b) +=
c"  *if* a returns a reference of some sort.  Ok, so maybe there is a
little to talk about.  :-)

--bb