Proposal: static template(fail)

[Janice Caron]

On 12/13/07, Gregor Richards <Richards at codu.org> wrote:
> I think a different
> syntax would be good, but the idea is sound.

Hey, we always argue about the syntax. It's a tradition! :-)

Yeah, I don't care about the syntax. I though of "static break" first,
but then I thought that might conflict with possible future features
(static switch/case/break anyone?). "template(fail)" was the best I
could come up with quickly, but probably not the best we can do
between us.