On 12/27/18 9:45 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 27 December 2018 at 08:53:30 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:
If this behavior is indeed intentional, it should at least be covered
in the spec.
I know the template part is intentional (including the identifier thing,
function names are allowed to share names with global identifiers and
override them locally), though indeed, it giving void I think is a bug.
Just in that category where nobody cares enough to put a lot of effort
into it.
A template evaluating to a type void is how
is(typeof(someTemplateDefinition)) works.
I don't know how much code would break, but it would not be
insignificant if this changed.
-Steve
