Extended Type Design.

[Frits van Bommel]

janderson wrote:
> BTW:
> 
> const!(char[])
> 
> Looks to much like a template to me, I'd imagine some syntax phasers 
> would have a harder time then necessary.

If you mean parsers, I don't think that'll be much of a problem. 'const' 
is a keyword, template names are not. If you use a syntax-highlighting 
reader you'll also see the difference between const!(char[]) and 
foo!(char[]) immediately, for the same reason.

(This is not to be construed as support for the "const!" syntax. I just 
dislike for different reasons ;) )