On 07/11/2015 12:50 AM, Vlad Levenfeld wrote:
On Friday, 10 July 2015 at 21:37:10 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/10/2015 12:50 AM, Vlad Levenfeld wrote:
On Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 16:08:37 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/09/2015 04:17 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/09/2015 02:54 PM, rsw0x wrote:
...
someone was willing to produce.
Someone is often willing to produce awkward language quirks, so I
think
being critical of new additions has some value.
E.g.
"Note: Cannot swap values by tuple assignment.
int x = 1, y = 2;
{x, y} = {y, x};
// Lowered to:
// x = y, y = x;
assert(y == 2);
assert(x == 2);"
No, please.
Couldn't this could be detected at compile-time and temporary variables
created?
Oh, it certainly is simple to fix, it's just that we don't want this
sort of thing to make it into the language specification.
Why not? Tuple handling seems like it should be a 1st class language
feature... the disconnect between Tuple and TypeTuple always bothered me
on a philosophical (and syntactic) level.
..?
We don't want the /broken/ thing, which I cited, to make it into the
language specification.
