DIP32: Uniform tuple syntax

[bearophile]

Zach the Mystic:

> Not disagreeing, but you had mentioned nullable types before, 
> and I was wondering what they might look like also. Have you 
> made an enhancement for these I could examine?

I opened this:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4571

Part of the syntax is:

T? means T nullable
T@ = means not nullable.

But that ER is a confused mess, and in the meantime the @disable 
was introduced. Now the probability of such nullable 
syntax+semantics to be introduced in D is very low, so probably I 
will close down that ER.

Bye,
bearophile