D and expression evaluation order.

[janderson]

Manfred Nowak wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote
> 
>> it isn't easy to do
> 
> If it is not easy to define the order for the specs,
> then it will not be easy to learn,
> then near to nobody will know of or rely on the definition in the 
> specs.
> 
> Remember that even M$ recommends to fully parenthese expressions 
> <because others might not know how to evaluate expressions without 
> parentheses>.
> 
> You once said, that you want to prohibit the upcoming of D-guru's. But 
> if you yourself are not able to immediately sketch such order here, 
> then you have the proof of upcoming gurus.
> 
> 
> If it is not easy to code then above arguments holds for compiler 
> writers too.
> 
> 
> -manfred

I agree.  Furthermore, I strongly think it should be left as is.  Why, 
because when I comeup against weird code like that, I don't want to have 
to consult the spec.  Its like implicit casting, if you don't know what 
is happening your going to have a terrible time figuring out what is 
happening.

This is one area where I think D could do a lot more to help the 
programmer avoid mistakes.

Furthermore if its difficult to implement, you've just made D harder for 
someone else to implement.

Please reconsider putting this in.

-Joel