To everybody proposing "full" tuple returns

[Bill Baxter]

downs wrote:
> Please, read the NG. The more powerful ()-based syntax has been brought up before, and nothing ever came of it (there's some ambiguity with the comma operator)
> 
> This time around, I chose a syntax that was intentionally based on existing language features, precisely to sidestep those issues.
> 
> Imnsho, multiple return values are useful enough to warrant an implementation even if we can't have full ()-based tuple assignment and returning support.
> 
>  --downs

You're talking about just bare parentheses right?  That's not the only 
option.  Right now from what I understand Tuple!(int,float) can be a 
return value from a D2 function.  So the question is just can we make a 
nicer way to write Tuple!(int, float) that isn't ambiguous.

You just need something to disambiguate out in front.

Like maybe @(int,float)

--bb