Proposal: Object/?? Destruction

[jmh530]

On Friday, 6 October 2017 at 19:51:39 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> No, under my thinking the original example should have been 
> what it was.
> Enclosing an expression in an additional set of parentheses 
> does not change its semantics. This is true even if one set of 
> parentheses is part of the function call.

Hmm, I hadn't realized that you can have multiple sets of 
parentheses without error. I was assuming you would treat the 
second set as a tuple.