https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12287
--- Comment #8 from Kenji Hara <k.hara...@gmail.com> 2014-03-02 18:46:53 PST --- (In reply to comment #7) > OK, so you pattern-match the template. > > But I don't think this is a good solution, because any recursive use of > __traits(parent) will need to take care of this special case. It goes against > the principle of least surprise. > > What are your arguments against a compiler change? Because your compiler change will make some part of the internal structure of the template instantiation invisible. Any compiler-side special handlings are unavoidable behavior for the all language users. So I'm afraid that your change might become harmful blocker for some users. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
