On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:52:56 -0400, Walter Bright
<[email protected]> wrote:
Ellery Newcomer wrote:
I might be missing something, but how does this proposal get around the
ambiguity in
(a,b,c)[0]
?
Currently, it's valid C syntax and valid D syntax. In your proposal it
would be valid tuple syntax too.
As has been proposed frequently, the , operator would have to be
dispensed with.
I think what Ellery is alluding to is it breaks the rule that things that
are valid C syntax do the same thing that happens in C. Of course we've
broken this rule a few times.
-Steve
