http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2779
--- Comment #6 from Andrei Alexandrescu <and...@metalanguage.com> 2011-07-22 09:10:47 PDT --- I understand your point, but also please consider how e.g. changing "double" to "float" in your second Tuple may cause a completely different path to be followed. For new code, the proposed feature looks interesting. For existing code, I think it only makes things difficult for everyone. And for what reason? Let's not forget what this feature brings us: the ability to not type ".expand". TODAY if I write: fun(tup); I just KNOW that func will be infoked with ONE argument, and if I write: fun(tup.expand); I also KNOW that fun will be DEFINITELY be invoked with EXACTLY as many arguments as elements are in tup. That all is great. The notion of the compiler taking the initiative of automatically expanding a tuple partially or totally transitively in attempt to find a match seems a complication very difficult to justify. I understand how the rules are simple and logical, but I don't think the result is. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
