* bogus codegen with static opAssign() usage *

[Bill Baxter]

Walter Bright wrote:
> kris wrote:
>> The syntax, however, is very clean. Importantly, it supports the 
>> unification or /centralization/ of all those 'new' invocations. I'd go 
>> so far as to say such a syntax could represent a bridge between OO and 
>> scripting:
>>
>> ----
>> String s = "mystring";
>> ----
>>
>> ----
>> File f = "/foo/bar.d";
>> ----
>>
>> ----
>> Regex r = "^(.*)$";
>> ----
>>
>> There's a fairly wide range of simple applicability for this kinda' 
>> thing. Would be great if static opAssign() could support this, or some 
>> other operator were enabled?
>>
>> How about it?
> 
> I don't get it. Exactly what transformation are you looking for?

He wants
    String s = "mystring";

To call something like:
    static String opConstruct(char[] str) {
           return new String(str);
    }

So that 's' get's initialized with a freshly allocated String.
With the current opAssign stuff you have to do:

      String s = new String;
      s = "mystring";

I've felt this too.  After you add an opCast, things like s="mystring" 
become valid, and soon after that you start to expect String s = 
"mystring" to work too.

--bb