Operator overloading for size_t

[Adam D. Ruppe]

On Thursday, 14 March 2019 at 18:07:46 UTC, Alec Stewart wrote:
>         // let's just stick with this.
>         return d_start.opEquals(other.d_start) && 
> d_end.opEquals(other.d_end);

Why not just use d_start == other.d_start && d_end == other.d_end 
there?


> So should I bother with operator overloading here, or just make 
> a member function?

You shouldn't often call .opEquals yourself, just write a == b 
and let the compiler translate it if it needs to.