http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3651
--- Comment #4 from Don <clugd...@yahoo.com.au> 2010-01-28 01:05:28 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > @Don: I'm pretty sure my bug report is correct. enums are the *only* type that > behave different here. Further, if you get the mangle of a function or > template > that use enums as parameters, the enum gets mangled using the type name, not > the base type. > > Why do you think the current behavior would be correct? Why would .mangleof > for > a type return the mangle for a completely *different* type? Because enums aren't strong types. typeof(item) is int, not foo. 'foo' just seems to be an alias for int. (I think the existing behaviour is stupid, BTW). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------