On Thursday, 22 March 2012 at 18:06:24 UTC, Felix Hufnagel wrote:
in addition to .codeof, let's think about .astof returning an abstract syntax tree.
I agree, as stated on the IRC, .astof (and therefor .astof.toString()) is a much better concept.
- Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof F i L
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof F i L
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof CTFE-4-the-win
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof Felix Hufnagel
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof F i L
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof F i L
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof Paulo Pinto
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof deadalnix
- Re: Proposal: __traits(code, ...) and/or .codeof deadalnix
