Robustness of the built in associative array

[Nick]

In article <e00v0m$te2$3 at digitaldaemon.com>, Oskar Linde says...
>
>Hello,
>
>The latest "Implicit fn template instantiation" thread contains code 
>that contains a hidden and possibly hard to find bug.
>[...]

Good catch!

>2) Why even keep the builtin AA? With the addition of an opIn() 
>overload, you could get *exactly* the same functionality from a library 
>implementation

Nope, in fact, you couldn't. The kicker is that the builtin AA uses some syntax
that is currently _impossible_ to duplicate in custom types. Eg. the following:

#  int[int] ii;
#  ii[10]++;

I find it rather confusing and frustrating. In my current project I ended up
making my own template AA to get around some of the deficiencies of the builtin
type. Mostly I wanted to avoid double lookups, and easily allow custom hashers
without encapsulating the key in a struct/class (think case-insensitive char[]
keys.) The result was also faster and more memory efficient than the builtin AA.

Nick