Your second example, Foo(...d)
, is correct, I agree. But why do you think (...Foo(true, false),)
should be rejected?
My intention with the current design was that ...ident
patterns should have the same meaning as ident @ ..
. Why do you want that to change?
tup
is already a tuple, there is no need to splat it. (I've updated the doc to specify this explicitly.)