equivariant functions

[Jason House]

Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:

> ore-sama wrote:
> > Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> > 
> >> typeof(s) stripl(const(char)[] s);
> >>
> >> This signature states that it returns the same type as an argument. I 
> >> propose that that pattern means stripl can accept _any_ subtype of 
> >> const(char)[] and return that exact type. Inside the function, however, 
> >> the type of s is the type declared, thus restricting its use.
> > 
> > this conflicts with current definition of typeof. Currently
> >  typeof(s) stripl(const(char)[] s); should be interpreted exactly as
> >  const(char)[] stripl(const(char)[] s);
> > it's unclear that typeof here gets type of actual argument rather than parameter. Currently typeof applies to parameter.
> 
> That is correct.
> 
> Andrei

I've never understood the reuse of keywords for new meanings. I much prefer new keywords for new concepts.