Re: Why typedef's shouldn't have been removed :(

[Timon Gehr]

On 05/11/2012 10:14 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

On 5/11/12, Steven Schveighoffer<schvei...@yahoo.com>  wrote:

Since null is its own type now..

What were the use-cases for making it a type? Seems odd to declare it:
typeof(null) x;

I mean what could you do with such a type?

eg. IFTI.

Object x;

void foo(T)(T arg){ x = arg; }

void main(){
    foo(null);
}

This didn't work when null was of type void*.
Unfortunately, there isn't a typeof([]).