Kagamin , dans le message (digitalmars.D.learn:30362), a écrit :
> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>
>> ahem, using dcollections:
>>
>> foreach(ref doRemove, cell; &organism.purge)
>> doRemove = cell.x == x && cell.y == y;
>>
>> complexity: O(n)
>
> may be a generic iteration handler would be more useful?
>
> foreach(ref handler, cell; &organism.each)
> if(cell.x == x && cell.y == y) handler.removeCurrent();
>
> it could provide a whole api, say, you may want to have lookahead
>
> foreach(ref handler, cell; &organism.each)
> if(cell.x == x && cell.y == y && handler.next.x==0)
> handler.removeCurrent();
That's not easier than using Tobias' improved foreach:
foreach(cell, cellRange; organism[])
if (cell.x == x && cell.y == y)
organism.remove(cellRange);
If you want to use algorithm specialized and optimized for the
container, I would prefer to use purge than each + handler. purge seems
better to me, because it can be specialized for the container and for
the action, and do not require to learn a new handler structure. "each"
do not seem to add a lot to foreach(cell, cellRange; range), since it
must be able to cope with any operation provided by handler, and any
operation combinaisons...
