> On 01.08.2011 23:43, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > > Actually I don't really need *uniform* distribution, it's just that > > when porting C code to D I didn't find any obvious random()/rnd() > > functions, and uniform seemed to be the closest thing without having > > to mess around with a bunch of randomization parameters which I don't > > care about. > > > > I don't see how we can claim D to be an elegant language with this mess: > > array(map!"a % 1024"(take(rndGen(), 1024))) > > > > That's just damn *horrible*. > > Dunno maybe it's only me, but some years ago when I used C++98 & STL > extensively I would find this line a very simple and clean solution. Now > time is changing and so on... > A thought - would amap as a shorthand for array(map... float your boat? > One pair of parens off.
Yeah. I confess that I don't see much ugly in that solution. It wouldn't hurt my feelings any to have a cleaner solution, but array(map!"a % 1024"(take(rndGen(), 1024))); seems fine to me. But maybe I'm just too used to the STL and std.algorithm. Regardless, it's _way_ cleaner than what you can achieve in C++98 trying to do the same thing. - Jonathan M Davis
