On Wednesday, 11 May 2016 at 10:50:47 UTC, Lionello Lunesu wrote:
On 10/5/2016 22:16, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 10 May 2016 at 10:09:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 5/10/16 12:52 PM, Mathias Lang wrote:
So, following DConf2016, I raised a P.R. to deprecate usage
of the comma
expressions, except within `for` loops increment [5].
The agreed-upon ideea was to allow uses that don't use the
result
(including for loops). No? -- Andrei
Let's just make it of void type, there was plan to recycle the
syntax
maybe, but whatever we do in the future, this is the sensible
first step.
Acutally, we can do two-birds-one-stone: instead of making it
void, make it a value tuple!
No. You can't change semantic to something that'll still work
under the feet of the user. If this syntax is to be recycled to
tuple, the value needs to be void for a while as to shake out
uses.
It is safe to go from void to something else, it isn't not to go
from something to something else.
