More D newb questions.

[Walter Bright]

Derek Parnell wrote:
> On Mon, 05 May 2008 14:16:02 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
>> 	T ~ T => T[]
> Not quite. Only if T is not an array would this be the expectation.

That means that it's an excessive burden on generic code to have to add 
an extra test to ensure that T is an array type else lest unexpectedly 
different code gets generated.

What do we do when T's a struct? Look inside the struct to see if it 
overloads opIndex? I propose that that's an excessive complication with 
little benefit, especially considering there's already unambiguous 
syntax to create an array out of values:

	[T, T] => T[]

So, we have the unambiguous syntax to create an array out of values, and 
another unambiguous syntax to concatenate arrays:

	T ~ T => T

and we have an ambiguous syntax to append or prepend values to an array:

	T ~ T[] => T[]
	T[] ~ T => T[]

I think there is no tern unstoned here.