Changing the behavior of the comma operator

[deadalnix]

On Wednesday, 26 March 2014 at 23:00:29 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
> On 3/26/14, 3:13 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 03/26/2014 08:49 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree. It's much better to fix the little breaking 
>>>> changes now,
>>>> and think about non-breaking improvements later. Because 
>>>> later the
>>>> breaking changes will become less and less possible.
>>>
>>> That later is already now.
>>
>> So how come there exists this thread on breaking the comma 
>> operator?
>
> Because it's arguably worth it. -- Andrei

Because it has been agreed a long time a ago, but now we are
backpedaling because we can't break code as much as we used to.

That being said, I'm quite satisfied with Andrei's void return
value proposal.