https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12446
--- Comment #5 from safety0ff.bugz <[email protected]> 2014-03-23 15:26:51 PDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > ... But there's always a way to test by measuring :o). Try it on a few typical > ranges. ("Typical" == cost of random access, if offered, shouldn't be > onerous.) It's not typical array-like random access ranges that will benefit, it's atypical ones where iteration is simple but indexing is non-trivial. For example, my "triangular" random access range which returns the tuples: [0, 0], [1, 0], [1, 1], [2, 0], [2, 1], [2, 2], [3, 0], [3, 1], [3, 2], [3, 3] Iteration is simple, but indexing involves solving a quadratic + some other operations. Even though one might not call this "onerous," there is still enough relative difference for it to be noticeable. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
