Overloading relational operators separately; thoughts?

[pineapple via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 30 September 2016 at 22:38:07 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> A more productive way forward is for you (and those who agree 
> with you) to prepare a formal DIP and submit it. It's the way 
> significant language change proposals are done.

A good idea.

I have written a rough initial draft for this DIP and it 
currently resides here, in a fork: 
https://github.com/pineapplemachine/DIPs/blob/operator_overload_expansion/DIPs/DIP1003.md

I invite anyone with an opinion - which I imagine is just about 
everyone who has participated in this thread - to please 
contribute to the DIP before it's submitted as a PR and for 
review.

I ask that arguments for and against listed in the DIP not 
include anything to the effect of merely "it would offer more 
flexibility" or "it would offer too much flexibility", as I think 
several pages of discussion have made clear that those holding 
either opinion are not likely to be swayed by arguments taking 
the opposing form.