retard wrote: <snip>
The difference is, in this case the generic foo doesn't need to be analyzed before it has been instantiated. There is no foo(string code) instances in the final executable, only the concrete instantiations. The analysis could be done when foo!(something) is encountered in the code.
It already is. It's part of how templates work: templates aren't semantically analysed, only instances of them are.
The problem lies in how the requirement for return statements is specified, as I've explained in my reply to Michel.
Stewart.
