Getter + increment haxe.Int64 variable compile error about haxe HOT 6 OPEN

Same issue there:

	static inline function allocUID() : UID {
		return (SEQ << (#if hxbit64 64 #else 32 #end - SEQ_BITS)) | (++UID);
	}

With hxbit.UID should be Int on ++UID. Reverting a57c74c fixes that.

from haxe.

I have no intuition for how accessor + operator overload should interact here. Should this behave the same way as the += case or what?

from haxe.

The case of @kLabz is exactly why I open this issue. I'm replacing it locally to continue my dev, with

UID += 1;
return (SEQ << (#if hxbit64 64 #else 32 #end - SEQ_BITS)) | (UID);

from haxe.

@Simn if we have a + operator, we should be able to use += and prefix/postfix ++ , by generating the following code:

x += 1; // x = X.add(x,1)
++x; // same
x++;  // { var tmp = x; x = X.add(x,1); tmp; }

from haxe.

Ok hang on, the specification is really not clear to me. We can have three different kinds of operator overload:

1. @:op(A + B)
2. @:op(A += B)
3. @:op(++A)

If I'm understanding what you're saying correctly, the following should be true:

1. An expression a + b only checks for @:op(A + B)
2. An expression a += b checks for @:op(A += B), and if that's not applicable it checks for @:op(A + B)
3. An expression ++a checks for @:op(++A), and if that's not applicable it checks for @:op(A += B), and if that's not applicable it checks for @:op(A + B)

Is that correct? Note that I'm not even talking about getters/setters because it seems like the problem here starts even earlier.

from haxe.

I thought that @:op(A++) is defined for haxe.Int64 which will performs an add1 (seems quite natural for me as that's an Int), I must have misunderstood something :'(
If I recall correctly, @ncannasse said that ++ on String should not be valid (but there is a + on String), so I do not think ++ should automatically performs a +1

from haxe.