@noreturn property

[Stewart Gordon]

On 25/10/2010 16:18, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
<snip>
> I proposed earlier that maybe you shouldn't be able to create void
> arrays directly. This would help with the "contains pointers" issue.

Indeed, void data is another issue here:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=679

> Maybe we can combine that with your idea, and void * is simply a vehicle
> to pass untyped data, and you can only use it if you cast it to
> something else?
<snip>

So effectively, you can't slice or take the length of a void[] or do 
arithmetic on void* - you have to cast it to something else first.  This 
would make sense.

But when it has two possible uses - as a container for untyped data and 
as a zero-length data type, are there generic programming difficulties?

Stewart.