Own type for null?

[Gor Gyolchanyan]

Functions, overladed on different types of arrays will always fail
with empty arrays unless empty arrays have their own type.

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Benjamin Thaut <code at benjamin-thaut.de> wrote:
> Am 26.10.2011 10:56, schrieb Timon Gehr:
>>
>> On 10/26/2011 07:49 AM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
>>>
>>> I recently tried to replace the deprecated overloading of new and delete
>>> and came across a serious issue. You can not use std.conv.emplace with
>>> null. If you pass null to it, null loses it's implicit casting
>>> cabablities and just becomes a void*.
>>> This issue pretty much exists with every template. As soon as you pass
>>> null to a template (compile time) information gets lost.
>>>
>>> Besides fixing std.conv.emplace it could be really handy to be able to
>>> check for a null-type at compile time for example with non-nullable
>>> types.
>>>
>>> There is already a enhancement reqeust in bugzilla since January but it
>>> didn't get much attention yet:
>>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5416
>>>
>>> Would this be a worthwile improvement for the langauge?
>>
>> ++vote.
>>
>> We also need an own type for the empty array literal '[]' btw.
>
> Do you have an example where a own type for [] would be usefull?
>
> --
> Kind Regards
> Benjamin Thaut
>