On Monday, 19 August 2013 at 18:40:58 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Case in point. :)
So we're actually talking at cross purposes here. Bearophile &
Meta et
al want native syntax for *runtime* tuples (i.e.
std.typecons.Tuple --
sorry for the mixup with std.range in my earlier posts), but
you're
talking about native syntax for alias tuples (aka TypeTuples).
Two
completely different things.
Now that I reread Kenji's DIP for a third time, I see/recall that
his intention was for this syntax to be for alias tuples. In that
case, wouldn't this necessitate a change in semantics? Will these
alias tuples using built-in syntax still auto-expand?
I agree that we shouldn't be making built-in syntax for a
library type.
If anything, any dedicated syntax should be reserved for alias
tuples
(aka std.typetuple.Typetuple). Or, at the very least, rename
TypeTuple
to AliasTuple.
I don't necessarily want built-in syntax for a library type, but
making tuples first-class would be nice. I mean, it's a bummer
that they can't be returned from functions. That should
definitely be changed.
Conflating these two concepts has led to endless confusion,
which is why
I insisted on addressing this issue before we even begin to
talk about
syntax. Otherwise we're going nowhere.
T
