Joseph Rushton Wakeling:
It wasn't clear to me what the benefits were, though,
For this function not a lot, but it's a good habit to have.
especially as I did consider making this an enforce() rather
than an assert().
If you want to use enforce then don't put them in pre-conditions.
But usually asserts should suffice.
And "in size_t v" is enough compared to "immutable size_t v".
Does "in" allow for subsequent mutation _within_ the function?
"in" implies scoped const. So you can't mutate the argument
inside the function/method. For reference types "immutable" is
even stronger.
For such kind of code I suggest to use UFCS chains.
Can you explain in a little more detail? It's not an aspect of
programming I'm familiar with.
auto r1 = iota(_sumHead[v], _sumHead[v + 1]).map!(a =>
_tail[_indexHead[a]]);
auto r2 = iota(_sumTail[v], _sumTail[v + 1]).map!(a =>
_head[_indexTail[a]]);
return chain(r1, r2);
Anyway, thanks very much for the useful feedback :-)
You are welcome,
bye,
bearophile
