finding errors with templates without instantiating them

[deadalnix]

On Thursday, 12 September 2013 at 05:04:29 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:
> On 9/11/2013 3:15 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I'm not against it, but I find it a very small improvement. 
>> Its user base is
>> exactly people who want to write and deploy a template without 
>> ever testing it
>> at all, ever. I have a hard time catering to that hypothetical 
>> crowd.
>
> I'm against it because it makes for a rather bastardized 
> semantic pass - expensive to specify, write and debug, and as 
> you point out of highly suspect merit.
>

Isn't that more or less required already for IFTI ?