Timon Gehr wrote: > In theory yes, but [...]
What a pity. Because in the code given only the types Elem!0 and Elem!1 must be indeed initialized. The fact, that the specification of the template describes a family of types with an infinite number of members should not force the front end to check wether all those members are initializable. If the executable is not allowed to build new types, which seems to be canonically, it is sufficient for the front end to check the initializability of those members, for which an initialization is imperative. This polishes my claim in digitalmars.D.learn:40939. For me now it appears as a bug, when the front end assumes, that the executable is allowed to build new types. -manfred
