opStar

[Bill Baxter]

0ffh wrote:
> Janice Caron wrote:
>> On 11/11/07, Walter Bright <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>> Because raw pointers don't have a .value property
>>
>> [random rant deleted]
> 
> Sigh.
> 
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Because raw pointers don't have a .value property, /and can't/ because
>> then you'd have problems with pointers to structs that have a value
>> member.
> [My italics.]

Well, Janice's point still stands.  If that were a real justification 
then we should be jumping up and down about the fact that ptr.sizeof 
returns 4 instead of the size of the thing it points to.

Walter should just address the real issue.  Are smart pointers in D 
really going to require (*p).member?  Or is there something else in the 
works for transparent overriding of member access?

--bb