string <-> null/bool implicit conversion

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 08/20/2015 10:43 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 8/20/15 4:38 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 19:54:22 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>> On 8/20/15 3:41 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, 20 August 2015 at 17:50:11 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> if(arr != null)
>>>>
>>>> Definitely don't do that. IMHO, "== null and "!= null" should be
>>>> illegal. If you really want to check for null, then you need to use "is
>>>> null" or "!is null", whereas if you want to check that an array is
>>>> empty, check its length or call empty. By using "== null" or "!= null",
>>>> you tend to give the false impression that you're checking whether the
>>>> object or array is null - which is not what you're actually doing.
>>>
>>> On the contrary, checking if it's equal to null checks to see if it
>>> has the same elements as null. That's exactly what I would want.
>>
>> And why would you want that? The length is meaningless if the pointer is
>> null. It shouldn't even be possible for the length to be anything other
>> than zero if the pointer is null.
>
> This makes me think you misunderstand what I am doing.
>
> -Steve

Which was my original point. :o)