Kenji Hara has created a very nice pull request that implements a first step of good tuple unpacking syntax for D, that is waiting for review and eventual improvements.
Walter has said (here: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6365#c26 ) that "We should step back and figure out what we want to do with tuples in the much more general case", this means he wants D tuples to be well thought-out to avoid future troubles, and I agree on this. So here here are my thoughts about one thing (probably the only one) that I don't like about Kenji Hara proposal. Currently this D code compiles and works, and I think it's bad/broken/ugly (http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6367 ): import std.typetuple; void main() { TypeTuple!(int, int) f = 10; assert(f[0] == 10); assert(f[1] == 10); } I think that this broken/bad behaviour is currently present in the proposed tuple unpacking syntax too: https://github.com/9rnsr/dmd/commit/0d05ce48ffe4e74f2d1ef04e1e6692a59d9ddb44 46 + auto (i, j) = 10; 47 + assert(i == 10); 48 + assert(j == 10); This goes against any implementation of tuples I have seen in all other languages, it's generally not useful, and I think it's going to cause troubles too. So I suggest to not carry this broken/bad behaviour of typetuples to tuples too. And I question this design for typetuples too. Is it a good design? I don't think so, I'd like to see it removed/disallowed for typetuples too (for uniformity with tuples too). And if you want to answer something about static arrays: int[2] a; a = 5; I question that syntax too, elsewhere I have asked that to become a syntax error, and accept only a slice assignment syntax, more uniform with all other vector operations: int[2] a; a[] = 5; Bye, bearophile
