http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7356
Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7356
--- Comment #5 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2012-01-26 04:07:44 PST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Some have Of, others don't. I don't see what Of adds, except verbosity.
IMHO, it comes from the typeof() feature.
First of all, and for
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7356
--- Comment #1 from Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 06:05:29 PST ---
I think the type-deduction template names should be 'KeyTypeOf' and
'ValueTypeOf'.
It is consistent with FunctionTypeOf and StringTypeOf (it's undocumented).
--
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7356
--- Comment #2 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2012-01-24
06:38:05 PST ---
I've based it on ReturnType. There's a mix of these names, such as:
FunctionTypeOf
FieldTypeTuple
Some have Of, others don't. I don't see what Of adds,
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7356
Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7356
bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc
---
