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

[Timon Gehr]

On 23.08.20 23:08, Per Nordlöw wrote:
> Why aren't more operators allowed inside `is(...)`-expressions?
> 
> For instance
> 
>      if (!is(CommonType!(typeof(min), typeof(max)) == void))
> 
> could be written as
> 
>      if (is(CommonType!(typeof(min), typeof(max)) != void))
> 
> .

So is(undefined != void) would be `true`? (Where `undefined` does not 
exist.)