Why does intpromote spew warnings for ~ operator?

[H. S. Teoh]

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 02:05:39PM -0400, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
> We have intpromote queued to go into the language. But it's even worse
> than the current status quo.

I agree.


> If we are going to change the rules, we might as well change them to
> be better (at least do what the user expects). That's all I'm saying.
> We don't need more hacks that almost nobody will use.
> 
> Sorry to be blunt, but the problem with such things is that it gives
> an excuse to allow the horror show to continue "if you don't like it,
> you can just use this library!"
[...]

You're welcome to push for change.  I'll even support you.

But currently I'm not holding out much hope that intpromote will turn
out for the better.  From what I've seen of it (and this thread proves
it), it will be a disaster.  This isn't the first time complaints about
intpromote came up.  But since Walter seems dead-set on pushing it
through, it will probably get through anyway.  At least D still lets you
use hacks like nopromote.d to shove the problem under the rug.


T

-- 
All problems are easy in retrospect.