More operators inside `is(...)` expressions

Alexandru Ermicioi alexandru.ermicioi at
Wed Aug 26 07:52:30 UTC 2020

On Tuesday, 25 August 2020 at 12:55:34 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
> On 8/25/20 3:12 AM, Alexandru Ermicioi wrote:
>> On Monday, 24 August 2020 at 12:28:27 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
>>> 1) Complicating the rules for is expressions further
>> It will complicate a lot more since, you can do type matching 
>> chains in is expression:
>> ------
>> is(T : Z[], Z != X, X : SomeType)
>> ------
> That doesn't look valid according to the grammar. Or if it 
> passes, it may not do what you think it does. You sure this 
> works?
> -Steve

Ah, sorry for bad english. It should be "could do type matching" 
not "can". If support for negation is added inside is expression, 
then it should also be supported in such chains as above, not 
just the simplest case as suggested by other people in this 

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list