https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23349
--- Comment #3 from RazvanN <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Bolpat from comment #2) > (In reply to RazvanN from comment #1) > > Why would we do this? The else-part is required to have parenthesis because > > of the ambiguity, but as far as I can see there is no way you could have an > > ambiguity for the assignment in the then-part. > > It’s not about ambiguity, it’s about consistency. I don't see why we need to limit something just for the sake of consistency. The limitation on the then-part is put in place because of the possibility of ambiguous cases. Since the then-part is always unambiguous, no limitation is put in place. I find that the argument of consistency is not valid in this case. Therefore, my suggestion is to close this as "WONTFIX". --
