Positive

[BCS]

Reply to Andrei,

> BCS wrote:
> 
>> Reply to Andrei,
>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> (Background: Walter has kindly allowed ".()" as an alternative to
>>> the ugly "!()" for template argument specifications.)
>>> 
>> Just adding more gas to the fire... Please, Oh Please NO!!!
>> 
>> I think the runtime/compiletime distinction is important, sort of for
>> the same reason that cast(T) is used (make things stand out, but Re
>> '!' not as a bad thing).
>> 
> This has been discussed. Implicit function template instantiation and
> compile-time function evaluation have been successful partly because
> they unify the run-time and the compile-time realms.
> 
> Andrei
> 

Yes they are good because they unify the implementation of RT&CT but that's 
not what I'm referring to. What I am liking is the disjunction between the 
use of them. I want to be able to look at a block of code and see at a glance 
that it will collapse to nothing in the executable or get put in as code 
to get executed.