Interesting work on packing tuple layout

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 6/14/20 2:25 PM, Paul Backus wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 June 2020 at 16:26:17 UTC, Avrina wrote:
>>
>> The situation also applies to the only tuple implementation in D. If 
>> you are proposing a new type with emphasis on reducing the footprint 
>> of the tuple then I don't see a problem with that. Changing the 
>> existing tuple implementation would be problematic.
> 
> Presumably any such change would be made backwards-compatible. So 
> Tuple.opIndex and Tuple.expand would still return elements in the order 
> specified by the user, even if that order is different from the internal 
> storage order.

Indeed.