On 02/17/2012 02:07 PM, Kevin Cox wrote:
Yes. At least as the compiler would say. It's a little odd but I believe that is how the D Nam mangling works. I personally just think of Foo!(Class) as the type.
class Foo(T){ ... }
Is syntactic sugar for
template Foo(T){
class Foo{ ... }
}
Therefore the type is Foo!(Class).Foo. I'd prefer the compiler to output
Foo!(Class) in error messages and for .stringof though, vote here:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7064
