Multiple return values

[F i L]

bearophile wrote:
> deadalnix:
>
>> I do agree with Andrei. Those are 2 orthogonals problems. The 
>> optimization problem is clearly something that can be improved 
>> in D ABI. Then, returning a tuple could be improved using 
>> thoses rules.
>
> I agree.
>
>
>> The multiple retur value problem is syntaxic sugar. It may be 
>> interesting, but not #1 priority.
>
> I don't agree. In this moment of the D development it's still 
> more important to design D well than to squeeze every bit of 
> performance out of the reference implementation.
>
> Example: currently vector operations have some small syntax 
> (and maybe semantic) problem, plus performance problems. I 
> think fixing their syntax is currently more important.
>
> Fixing performance problems is possible to do later in GDC/LDC 
> if the language design is good, but fixing the syntax later is 
> quite harder to do.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

+1 to this. Performance is key to D's success of course, but what 
will attract more developers is clean and bug free aesthetics. 
DMD already outperforms MS/Mono C# in all of my modest 
benchmarks. GDC and LDC much more so.

The first two things that really made me want to use D where 
reading about it's built-in Arrays and Unittests. Multiple return 
syntax could only make D feel more hip. A complaint I've heard 
before is how C-like D tries to be with it's library naming (eg, 
std.writeln vs Console.WriteLine), so I don't think tradition or 
heritage are good ways to increase support. While D's naming 
seems natural enough to me or anyone who's written C/C++ code, 
from an outside perspective you might wounder why there was 
module dealing with venereal disease.

I know you D developers, have a lot on your plates. Thank you all.