On 05/29/2014 08:22 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Thu, 29 May 2014 07:32:48 -0700
> Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-announce
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 05/29/2014 03:00 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
>> > I don't see how you could argue that they don't have
>> multi-dimensional arrays.
>> Their specs don't have such a thing. It is possible to have arrays
>> where elements are arrays but that does not make those concepts
>> language constructs.
> And how as an array of arrays _not_ a multi-dimensional array? As far
as I can
> tell, they're exactly the same thing just phrased differently.
It is not a multi-dimensional array from the point of view of the
language spec. There is no such thing. Although, I agree that it exists
as a concept and in human speech.
What you seem to expect from the language is the acceptance of the
concept of multi-dimensional array as a first-class language construct.
You want the language to have a special multi-dimensional array
What I am saying is that since there is no such language construct,
coming up with a special syntax just to satisfy some of the users would
be an inconsistency in the language, which contradicts what everybody is
looking for (Scott, you, be, etc. :) )
> - Jonathan M Davis