DIP1001: DoExpression

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On 9/6/16 10:17 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 06.09.2016 16:12, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure I agree with the general principal of the DIP though. I've
>> never liked comma expressions, and this seems like a waste of syntax.
>> Won't tuples suffice here when they take over the syntax? e.g. (x, y,
>> z)[$-1]
>
> (Does not work if x, y or z is of type 'void'.)

Let's first stipulate that z cannot be void here, as the context is you 
want to evaluate to the result of some expression.

But why wouldn't a tuple of type (void, void, T) be valid? It could also 
auto-reduce to just (T).

-Steve