On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 10:19:22 UTC, Márcio Martins wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 07:42:09 UTC, Roland Hadinger wrote:
At this moment I'm tempted to implement a function taking a
range of elements E and returning an infinite range of
Nullable!E.
[...]
Wouldn't it still require the algorithms to check if an element
isNull()?
Naturally. But this check can be done further down the function
chain,
so all the functions before will see an infinite range.
I'm currently writing a lexer (big loop with two levels of switch
statements inside) that needs to some looking ahead in multiple
states. Normally, each of those lookaheads would require a check
for "end of input". I want to avoid this because of the large
number of states.
