Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:55:10 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Sergey Gromov wrote: >> Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:38:35 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> >>> Sergey Gromov wrote: >>>> Comma expression is not ambiguous. It's a comma expression. Renaming >>>> it into a tuple constructor expression does not add any ambiguity. >>>> Parentheses here are only required to separate the comma expression from >>>> an assignment expression which otherwise would become a part of comma >>>> expression. Sure there are problems with making tuples first-class, but >>>> this is certainly not one of them. >>> I don't understand. So are you suggesting that the comma expression gets >>> sacked? >> >> Now comma expression drops all the results but the last one. You lose >> nothing by making it keep other results as well. Then you can make it >> extract the last element as a result of an implicit cast. > > That won't work because you'd paste C code into your D code and it'll > compile with different results.
It should be possible to make the C pattern work as expected. I need to think about this in more detail to be sure. >>>> I'm putting together a blog post about a possible design of first-class >>>> tuples in D. Hope it won't take too long. >>> What does "first-class" mean? >> >> First-class values, like, native, with built-in compiler support. > > A tuple is a parameterized type, not a value. And first-class doesn't > mean with built-in compiler support. Probably I've mis-used the first-class thing here.
