On Saturday, 9 February 2013 at 22:54:09 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2013-02-09 21:51, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I think that's asking for confusion to have different
visibility rules
inside and outside typeof().
The typical way to access private members when really needed
is via a
reflection mechanism, and we already have a way to do that as
two
people have mentioned.
Couldn't typeof() be considered part of a reflection mechanism?
May be, but definitely not an advanced librar'ish one - contrary
to .tupleof and some __traits is is a pretty common guest in user
code.
