Comment #0 by peter.alexander.au — 2011-01-03T12:48:09Z
The usage of .stringof on its own (with no preceding object) doesn't appear to be documented anywhere, yet it appears to be legal and returns the name of the module it resides in, e.g. in foo.d, it would evaluate to "module foo".
This should be added to the language spec.
Comment #1 by peter.alexander.au — 2011-01-03T12:50:18Z
Also, if we are in module foo.bar, it returns "module bar". Is this correct behaviour?
Comment #2 by peter.alexander.au — 2011-01-03T13:02:17Z
Finally, is there any reason that the return value is prefixed with "module"?
1. I can't imagine any use for it.
2. If people needed it, it would be trivial to add ("module " ~ .stringof)
3. If they don't want it, it's a little trickier (splitter(.stringof)[1], or ugly .stringof[7..$])
I would recommend that in module foo, .stringof == "foo".
Comment #3 by andrej.mitrovich — 2013-01-11T19:54:13Z
*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 3007 ***