Is this actually supposed to be legal?

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 14:48:32 David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, 17 July 2012 at 05:24:26 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > This code strikes me as being a bug:
> > 
> > --------
> > class MyBase(T)
> > {}
> > 
> > class MySubA : MyBase!MySubA
> > {}
> > 
> > class MySubB : MyBase!MySubB
> > {}
> > 
> > void main()
> > {}
> > --------
> 
> This pattern is actually quite common in C++ code, and referred
> to as CRTP (curiously recurring template pattern). If you propose
> to kill it, Andrei is going to get mad at you. ;)

Well, it certainly seems insane to me at first glance - particularly when you 
take compile time reflection into account, since the derived classes' 
definitions are now effectively recursive (so I suspect that the situation is 
worse in D, since C++ doesn't have conditional compliation like D does). But 
if it's supposed to be legal, I guess that it's suppose to be legal. I'd never 
seen the idiom before, and it seemed _really_ off to me, which is why I brought 
it up. But I'd have to study it in order to give an informed opinion on it.

- Jonathan M Davis