DMD 0.165 release

[Walter Bright]

BCS wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Derek Parnell wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:06:12 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>>> BCS wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> given
>>>>>
>>>>> void foo(char[]);
>>>>> void foo(char[] delegate());
>>>>>
>>>>> how do I force the use of  the first?
>>>>
>>>> You can't. Think of it like:
>>>>
>>>> void foo(in int x);
>>>> void foo(out int y);
>>>> void foo(inout int z);
>>>>
>>>> Can't force the use of one of those, either.
>>>
>>>
>>> But why is that *not* a problem with the language?
>>
>>
>> A good question. I think the answer is that one would be want to 
>> overload based on in/out/inout only to write obfuscated code.
> 
> but the lazy vs. non-lazy question isn't so simple
> 
> 
> log(RunSQLStuff());
> 
> vs.
> 
> log("This is a string");
> 
> 
> ???

I don't see what the problem is?