Template instantiation syntax

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"Walter Bright" wrote
> Jason House wrote:
>> Is it ok to chain!nested!templates?  Gramatically, it's unambiguous.
>
> No. The problem is, which is it?
>
> a!b!c can be a!(b!c) or a!(b)!(c)
>
> Andrei argued that it should be the former, as that is much more useful. 
> The problem is,
>
> a!b!c
>
> should be equivalent to:
>
> a!(b)!(c)
>
> which is then equivalent to:
>
> a!(b!(c))
>
> which makes no sense, because what does:
>
> a!(b,c)!(d)
>
> mean then? It becomes a morass of special cases with no comprehensible 
> rules to guide us. So, we gave up, and decided to make a!b!c illegal for 
> now.

a!(b)!(c) makes no sense.  Does (a!(b))!(c) make any sense?

Can a template be aliased to a template symbol that still needs parameters? 
I didn't think it could.

For instance, can you do something like:

class C(T) {}

template D(T)
{
   alias C D;
}

Would that even compile?  (don't have dmd handy)

-Steve