Revert "Implicit operator removed"

[mcintyre321]

Reverts #16

[mcintyre321]

@Paul-Williams I've just accepted, then reverted your PR!

I have just reviewed #10, which adds

        public static bool operator ==(ValueOf<TValue, TThis> a, object b)
        {
            return b is TThis other && a == other;
        }

        public static bool operator !=(ValueOf<TValue, TThis> a, object b)
        {
            return !(a == b);
        }
        

With those operators in place, and the implict cast method, we get the following results

void Main()
{
	Foo foo = Foo.From("asd");
	Foo2 foo2 = Foo2.From("asd");
	("asd" == foo).Dump(); //true
	("asd" == foo2).Dump(); //true
	(foo2 == foo).Dump(); //false 
}
class Foo : ValueOf<string, Foo> { }

class Foo2 : ValueOf<string, Foo2> { }

Does this solve your original issue with the implicit cast, or am I missing something?

[Paul-Williams]

This code does not seem to work as intended.
It breaks your equality test:
Assert.IsTrue(clientRef1 == "ASDF12345");

Additionally the test:
("asd" == foo).Dump(); //true
breaks, if inverted to:
(foo == "asd").Dump(); //false

It also still allows the comparison of two different ValueOf types, which although is not a bug, is a design choice I think goes against the idea of avoiding primitive obsession. It means you could still compare an EmailAddress to a UserName. This, I think is what this class is intended to avoid.