On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 03:25:55AM +0000, Stanislav Blinov via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: > On Tuesday, 23 June 2020 at 02:41:55 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > > As things stand, uncopyable ranges aren't really a thing, and common > > range idiomns rely on ranges being copyable. > > Which idioms are those? I mean, genuine idioms, not design flaws like > e.g. references. > > > We'd need some major redesigning to make uncopyable ranges work, and > > personally, I don't think that it's worth the trouble. > > Of course we would. Andrei is entertaining changing the whole input > range API. Though he, like you, seems opposed to the idea of > uncopyables. [...]
I'm also wondering what's the motivation behind supporting non-copyable ranges, and whether it's worth the effort and inevitable complications to support it if it's a rare use-case. Do you have any compelling use-case in mind, that might make this worthwhile? T -- Любишь кататься - люби и саночки возить.
