[Issue 1069] No error on type mismatch with varargs

[Frits van Bommel]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> d-bugmail at puremagic.com wrote:
>>
>> What you're seeing is an unfortunate side-effect of the combination of 
>> lazy
>> [void delegate()] arguments with the fact that a function name doesn't 
>> evaluate
>> to a pointer/delegate to that function but to its return value (i.e. 
>> property
>> syntax).
> 
> And here I thought lazy parameters had to be marked 'lazy'.  That's 
> annoying.  Thanks :-)

This is the one exception where 'implicit lazy' was kept when the 
keyword was introduced.