DMD 1.019 and 2.003 releases

[BCS]

Reply to 0ffh,

> BCS wrote:
> 
>> Reply to 0ffh,
>> 
>>> If I know that testing a condition is nothing but comparing a number
>>> to zero, writing "if (number!=0)" just becomes redundant.
>>> 
>> actually ASM usually has built in >, < and = comparisons, some times
>> these implicitly use 0 for the other side, but it still it is not
>> /just/ a zero test.
>> 
> Forgive me if I am being thick, but given C (or even D), when does
> "if (x!=0)" (or "if (x!=null)") ever give a different result from "if
> (x)"?

Never to my understanding. However this is a good reason to do the more verbose 
one in that the compiler gets more info and then can use that for optimization 
(maybe). That however is more of a general rule rather than just for this 
case.