On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 02:26:12 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 01:36:46 UTC, bearophile wrote:
C code should not silently behave differently in D, even five
years from now, so I am not interested in using the C comma
syntax for D tuples. I am OK with a D tuple syntax that is not
allowed in C.
It won't silently break. I concede it will break.
There are some corner cases where it might silently behave
differently:
int a, b;
a, b = (1, 2);
This is apparently allowed in C, and will be equivalent to "b =
2;". But if we require parentheses, at least GCC 4.8.1 rejects it:
int a, b;
(a, b) = (1, 2);
tuple.c:3:8: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment
(a, b) = (1, 2);
^
So, with carefully tweaking the tuple syntax, we can probably
reject any valid C code.
