--- Comment #6 from Nick Treleaven <> 2012-10-06 
10:28:49 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The problem is that UFCS was made to work with functions and typeof is not a
> function. Accepting identifier.typeof would result in questions about which
> identifiers are valid for this and what else works besides typeof with them.

This is not to do with UFCS. There are already many built in properties like
x.sizeof, x.init:

typeof fits nicely as a built in property, and helps cut down on nested

Configure issuemail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to