typeof(typename) fails silently

[BCS]

Reply to Sean,


> I'm of two minds on this.  The is expression already requires whatever
> it contains to be a type or there will be a compile-time error, but
> with the change to typeof we no longer have a bullet-proof way of
> ensuring that something is a type.  So either we use is(T) and hope T
> is a type or use is(typeof(T)) and hope T is not a type (because if T
> is a type then the condition will silently fail).  Neither is ideal,
> for obvious reasons.
> 

is(T) || is(typeof(T))

??