On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 01.01.21 19:53, Rekel wrote:
>> Is this DIP dead?
>
> Let's say it's hibernating. Originally I wanted to spend time on it during the hackathon at dconf 2018. Andrei wanted me to instead work on __mutable, claiming it was of strategic importance while tuples are not. He then completely binned __mutable later. Right now I am just too busy to champion this, and the lack of enthusiasm from decision makers does not help motivate me to attempt trading some of my health for tuples.
>
>> Several parts of the proposal seem very nice to me, and it seems like a waste not to have it considered. (assuming https://github.com/tgehr/DIPs/blob/tuple-syntax/DIPs/DIP1xxx-tg.md is the latest version of this not submitted proposal)
>> ...
>
> It's mostly a matter of rebasing/finishing the implementation and possibly arguing on the forums for a couple of weeks/months.
>
>> Slightly unrelated, but wouldn't it be better to change the comma operator to a different symbol entirely?
>
> Ideally we'd just add tuple syntax and then use (..,..,..)[$-1] as a replacement for the comma operator.

If we could get what is described in your Dip, this would be a huge win for D. If my understanding is correct, a lot of other users  in the community are sharing this opinion.

Is there anything which can be done here to support you, like an official donation?

While it is of course really great having already an implementation for the Dip, it is actually not needed for the Dip and causes extra effort for you.
Would it be possible for you just to round up the Dip?
Implementation could follow after approval, also done by other developers.

Kind regards
Andre

On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 01.01.21 19:53, Rekel wrote:
>> Is this DIP dead?
>
> Let's say it's hibernating. Originally I wanted to spend time on it during the hackathon at dconf 2018. Andrei wanted me to instead work on __mutable, claiming it was of strategic importance while tuples are not. He then completely binned __mutable later. Right now I am just too busy to champion this, and the lack of enthusiasm from decision makers does not help motivate me to attempt trading some of my health for tuples.

Hmmm

On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 01.01.21 19:53, Rekel wrote:
>> Is this DIP dead?
>
> Let's say it's hibernating. Originally I wanted to spend time on it during the hackathon at dconf 2018. Andrei wanted me to instead work on __mutable, claiming it was of strategic importance while tuples are not. He then completely binned __mutable later. Right now I am just too busy to champion this, and the lack of enthusiasm from decision makers does not help motivate me to attempt trading some of my health for tuples.
>
>> Several parts of the proposal seem very nice to me, and it seems like a waste not to have it considered. (assuming https://github.com/tgehr/DIPs/blob/tuple-syntax/DIPs/DIP1xxx-tg.md is the latest version of this not submitted proposal)
>> ...
>
> It's mostly a matter of rebasing/finishing the implementation and possibly arguing on the forums for a couple of weeks/months.
>
>> Slightly unrelated, but wouldn't it be better to change the comma operator to a different symbol entirely?
>
> Ideally we'd just add tuple syntax and then use (..,..,..)[$-1] as a replacement for the comma operator.

I am currently working on properties right now and that requires all my focus on that. I have a unfinished DIP on tuples which is no where near finished as I wanted.

I am willing to spend 500 us dollars on a bounty for tuples if that gives you the motivation to finished this.

On Tuesday, 5 January 2021 at 15:45:13 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> [...]
>
> I am currently working on properties right now and that requires all my focus on that. I have a unfinished DIP on tuples which is no where near finished as I wanted.
>
> I am willing to spend 500 us dollars on a bounty for tuples if that gives you the motivation to finished this.

Whats the current status on this?

On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 19:52:26 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 January 2021 at 15:45:13 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>> On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> I am currently working on properties right now and that requires all my focus on that. I have a unfinished DIP on tuples which is no where near finished as I wanted.
>>
>> I am willing to spend 500 us dollars on a bounty for tuples if that gives you the motivation to finished this.
>
> Whats the current status on this?

What do you mean by "this"? The properties? I have already told you that.

On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 20:05:02 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 19:52:26 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 5 January 2021 at 15:45:13 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I am currently working on properties right now and that requires all my focus on that. I have a unfinished DIP on tuples which is no where near finished as I wanted.
>>>
>>> I am willing to spend 500 us dollars on a bounty for tuples if that gives you the motivation to finished this.
>>
>> Whats the current status on this?
>
> What do you mean by "this"? The properties? I have already told you that.

Oops, didn't mean to reply to you, sorry

On Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 19:52:26 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 5 January 2021 at 15:45:13 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>> On Sunday, 3 January 2021 at 05:44:57 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> I am currently working on properties right now and that requires all my focus on that. I have a unfinished DIP on tuples which is no where near finished as I wanted.
>>
>> I am willing to spend 500 us dollars on a bounty for tuples if that gives you the motivation to finished this.
>
> Whats the current status on this?

From Timon's statement,

> the lack of enthusiasm from decision makers does not help motivate me to attempt trading some of my health for tuples.

Hence it's on hibernation.

On Sunday, 10 January 2021 at 00:15:56 UTC, aberba wrote:

>
>> the lack of enthusiasm from decision makers does not help motivate me to attempt trading some of my health for tuples.
>
> Hence it's on hibernation.

It's really a pity.
The fact one can return a struct, yet cannot return a few distinct values at once (i.e. tuple) seems an odd remnant of some early technical limitation.

On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 12:33:06 UTC, angel wrote:
> On Sunday, 10 January 2021 at 00:15:56 UTC, aberba wrote:
>
>>
>>> the lack of enthusiasm from decision makers does not help motivate me to attempt trading some of my health for tuples.
>>
>> Hence it's on hibernation.
>
> It's really a pity.
> The fact one can return a struct, yet cannot return a few distinct values at once (i.e. tuple) seems an odd remnant of some early technical limitation.

Walter has commented on this before, and apparently he tried to unify the two, but there are some ABI issues with doing that (I have no idea what those might be).