On Monday, 17 February 2014 at 20:21:30 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
I wouldn't call it randomly. In that case you should call it randomly that it suddenly doesn't run once you try to step downward.
I didn't had time to work more on the iota. Perhaps after 2.065 is out I can resume working on that, but I'm really short of time right now.
Allowing iota to iterate downward might become a horrible idea when we finally extend iota to other non-numeric types. The big issue is that types that define both opUnary!"++" and opUnary!"--" would behave in a completely different way from types that only define opUnary!"++".
from http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mwwznnobgecnwermr...@forum.dlang.org
example: type T implements ++t and --t; type P only implements ++p; t1 < t2 => iota(t2, t1) has a way to compute a non-empty range; p1 < p2 => iota(p2, p1) can do nothing but return an empty range; This really looks like a minefield to me.
