On Tuesday, January 03, 2012 19:48:53 bearophile wrote: > Jonathan M Davis: > > I'm not saying anything about the value of the feature. I'm just saying > > that given D's lineage, it's not at all suprising that it doesn't > > support multiple return values. In fact, it would be very abnormal if > > it did. The OP seems to expect that modern languages would support such > > a feature, whereas many do not - particularly the C-based ones. > > OK. > For fun here is a slightly modified version of your text: > > "I'm not saying anything about the value of the feature. I'm just saying > that given D's lineage, it's not at all suprising that it doesn't support > nested functions. In fact, it would be very abnormal if it did. The OP > seems to expect that modern languages would support such a feature, whereas > many do not - particularly the C-based ones." > :-)
Well, yeah. Having nested functions in C-based languages is not normal, and I don't believe that most other "modern" languages have them either, so it's arguably unreasonable to _expect_ that D would have nested functions, because it's a modern language. That doesn't mean that it _won't_ have nested functions (or multiple return values), but _expecting_ that it will simply because it's a modern programming language is arguably unreasonable. - Jonathan M Davis