Ranges

[robert fraser]

grauzone Wrote:
> Your example doesn't compile right now. 

The "@@@" was meant as an example to be replaced with any code. Yeah, you probably knew that.

> But if you use a string mixin, 
> the code doesn't even have to be syntactically/lexically valid:
> 
> is(typeof({ mixin("@@@"); }))


True -- both these features (string mixins and is-expressions) are rife with pitfalls. But they're both very useful features (if you get rid of string mixins, 25% of my code will stop compiling...). Silent compilation is dangerous indeed, but also very powerful.

I was just suggesting we need a better syntax, but I realized we have one: __traits(compiles). Why Andrei isn't using this is the real mystery.