On 6/4/25 4:10 AM, Monkyyy wrote: > On Wednesday, 4 June 2025 at 02:11:18 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: >> . But in general, containers should NOT be conflated with ranges. That >> only leads to wrong design. >> >> range should NOT mutate the container. It should be regarded as >> something separate from the container. > > Not "general". It's a safety vs speed tradeoff. Immutable whatever's > data structure do just make allot of copies or allot of pointer overhead > and indirection.
I don't understand. Like H. S. Teoh said, a range over a container should not alter the container. I'm not aware of any data structure where that's not the case.
If a container has a way of accessing the elements (which it definitely has to because otherwise it's not really a container), then a light-weight range can be specified over the elements.
Ali
