unittesting generic functions

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 8/13/2014 7:54 PM, Chris Cain wrote:
> Current behavior is 1. So it'd be really necessary to come up with some new,
> unambiguous syntax to put the unittest after the function. Whereas the current
> proposal doesn't create an ambiguity and doesn't need new, special syntax to
> perform this task.

That's a good and insightful point.