== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > grauzone wrote: > >> > >> Also, you should fix the auto-flattening of tuples before it's too > >> late. I think everyone agrees that auto-flattening is a bad idea, and > >> that tuples should be nestable. Flattening can be done manually with > >> an unary operator. > >> > >> (Introducing sane tuples (e.g. unify type and value tuples, sane and > >> short syntax, and all that) can wait for later if it must. Introducing > >> these can be downwards compatible, I hope.) > > > > Non-flattening should be on the list but I am very afraid the solution > > would take a long time to design, implement, and debug. I must discuss > > this with Walter. > > > > Andrei > Might I suggest a daring stop-gap: kill tuples altogether. > Then we can implement them later correctly and it won't break backwards > compatibility. > Ideally it isn't an all-or-nothing proposition either. Maybe we can > just kill the parts that are bad. Like disallow tuples-of-tuples, but > allow tuples that are already flat. > - Chad
But that would destroy most of the metaprogramming capabilities of D.