Behavior of opEquals
Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Sep 3 06:05:50 PDT 2015
On 9/2/15 2:57 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> In this case the solution/workaround is to explicitly call
> super.opEquals, but that will miss some optimizations implemented in
> object.opEquals.
Those optimizations have already been exploited by the time you get to
Foo.opEquals, so I wouldn't worry about that.
However, the avoidance of casting would be a good goal. One of the
things I don't like about the current == implementation for objects is
it cannot take any advantage of type knowledge at the call site.
-Steve
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list