On 3/25/14, 10:45 AM, Asman01 wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 March 2014 at 17:33:20 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
After the recent discussions regarding the comma operator, and after
inspecting the patterns of code affected by it, Walter and I would
back up the following change to the D language:
1. The comma operator stays with its current syntax.
2. The semantics is the same unless warnings are enabled with "-w"
3. In "-w" mode, semantics are changed in that the type of the comma
operator is NOT the type of its last expression, but instead it's void.
4. Later on the warning will be promoted to a deprecation followed by
removal from the language.
5. Reintroducing the result type as a tuple remains a future possibility.
We believe the change would be beneficial for the following reasons:
1. Based on druntime and phobos, the breakage is likely to be infrequent.
2. The change may catch (and has caught) important bugs caused by
misplacing closing parentheses.
3. Most code using the result of the comma expression looks foreign
even to seasoned programmers and might gain in clarity from a refactor.
Please reply to discuss this possibility.
Andrei
At first I throught didn't remove comma operator from language because
it will make(possibly) hard to C/C++ guys porting code to D but instead
of it will be allowed but return void type? why is this better than remove?
You are responding to the post replying all of these questions.
Adnrei
