On Friday, 5 October 2012 at 00:39:40 UTC, timotheecour wrote:
Is the plan to deprecate comma operator for chaining
expressions?
I would love to see more syntactic sugar to support tuples, and
comma operator would be the best fit for that purpose.
eg:
----
import std.typecons;
auto fun(){
return tuple(1,"abc");
//1) ideally, we should be able to write:
//return (1,"abc");
//with same semantics (and no need to import std.typecons)
}
//at the call site: currently:
auto t=fun();
auto a=t[0];
auto b=t[1];
//2) ideally, we should be able to write:
auto (a,b,c)=fun();
//3) or even:
(a,b,c)=fun();
----
Will it be difficult to implement 2)? (by far the most
important of 1,2,3)
Is 1) and 3) a good idea?
Surely the ideal is what you're written but also allowing the
omission of parens where it's unambiguous? Just to keep this idea
in people's minds:
return 1, "abc";
That would seem like the ideal to me as would:
double, string fun(double, double n) {
return n[0] * n[1], "abc";
}
Should these uses require parens like this?
(double, string) fun((double, double) n) {
return (n[0] * n[1], "abc");
}
As discussed before the parens are unavoidable for assignment
given the need to avoid breaking vast quantities of code.
