int opEquals(Object), and other legacy ints

[Walter Bright]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> Well, let's think about the other way around then. Why should bool be 
> constrained to 0 or 1? Why not, same as kris said, 0 would be false, and 
> non zero would be true. Then we could have an opEquals or any function 
> returning a bool instead of int, without penalty loss.
> 
> The only shortcoming I see is that it would be slower to compare two 
> bool /variables/:
>    (b1 == b2)
> that expression is currently just 1 instruction, a CMP, but without the 
> 0,1 restriction it would be more (3, I think, have to check that). 
> However, is that significantly worse? I think not. I think comparison 
> between two bool _variables_ is likely very rare, and when it happens it 
> is also probably not performance critical. (statistical references?)
> Note: this would not affect at all comparisons between a bool variable 
> and a bool literal. Like (b == true) or (b == false).

I think most programmers would find this to be very surprising behavior. 
I know I would.