DMD 1.005 release

[Walter Bright]

Don Clugston wrote:
> Isn't it always going to be true that the scope where stringof is 
> applied, could be different from where it is mixed in?

Yes.

> That's why I figured that the concept of symbolnameof (the minimal 
> descriptor in the scope) was different from qualifiednameof (valid in 
> any scope). Of course, you've got access to much more information than I 
> did, so perhaps there's a cleaner solution.

It obviously needs more work <g>.