"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1557.1310461819.14074.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > Personally, I'm > _far_ more inclined to say that you should just expect to have to slice > something when you pass it to a range-based function.
That's my thinking too. > It would likely be better, however, to simply make it > so that slices of them can be used with range-based functions such as is > the > case with static arrays. I really think this was always supposed to work, but the compiler was modified to allow slicing typedefs to result in typedefs. Hopefully my patch for this will get pulled soon.
