On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 10:47:38 +0200 "foobar" <f...@bar.com> wrote: > > Nope. > One of the ways in math to "build" the positive numbers based on > set theory is via singletons: > n := |tuple of empty tuples| > so "1" is defined as { {} } whereas "0" is simply {}. That does > not work with the above suggestion. Now, I realize this is an > arguably convoluted math example but it does show that the > treating { {} } as {} is limiting the expressive power of tuples. >
And int's are limiting compared to mathematical integers. So what? So ok, maybe this is limiting from a theoretical standpoint. But practically speaking? I dunno. We're not making tuples to emulate set theory here, we're just looking for ad-hoc anonymous structs. Besides, I only said they were logically the same thing, not mechanically. I'm only suggesting that a one-element tuple be implicitly convertible to/from the type of its element. So there would likely still be the different types, it just makes sense that you should be able to use one as the other.