Replacing the comma operator

[Stewart Gordon]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
<snip>
> No, sorry. Usually I strive to be precise, but this time I just wasn't. 
> The plan is to define order of evaluation to be lexical order. Somehow I 
> can't convince Walter that that means assignment too!
<snip>

I still would like to know where you found that plan!

The decision to leave order of evaluation unspecified was a deliberate 
one at the time, and for good reasons.

One of these reasons was to open the option of evaluating subexpressions 
in parallel.  I'm not sure what the others were, but another 
optimisation potential that comes to my mind is to minimise the working 
memory while still allowing expressions to be written in an intuitive order.

Who has decided that these reasons are no longer good, and why?

Stewart.