Tuple unpacking syntax [Was: Re: Multiple return values...]

[foobar]

On Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 22:26:14 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>
>> Let me put it another way: I don't see one syntax over another 
>> a deal maker or deal breaker. At all.
>
> I am usually able to follow threads, but this time I am a bit 
> lost (this discussion has mixed very different topics like 
> ABIs, implementation efficiency of tuples and typetuples, a 
> hypothetical not-really-a-tuple third-kind of tuple, built-in 
> syntax, library implementation code, etc). Is someone able and 
> willing to summarize the current situation of this discussion?
>
[snip]
> So I think we should put this thread back on the rails. Library 
> implementations are not enough here. I suggest to start 
> discussing about what's wrong in the proposed D syntax patch, 
> solve the problems Walter has with it.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

Yeap, I'm confused as well. D's tuple support seems to be 
completely messed up.
This reminds me - what was the semantic problem with the auto 
unpacking in a function's parameter list?
Personally, I think D ought to learn from the experts on this. 
Take a look at how FP languages implement this. E.g take a look 
at ML or Haskell for pointers.