On Wednesday, 18 October 2017 at 06:45:37 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 October 2017 at 14:15:02 UTC, Andrea Fontana
wrote:
auto splitBy(alias F, R)(R range)
Because of lazyness shouldn't it be named something with
splitter, say splitterBy, instead?
Yes but I think it is something more similar to chunkBy, but
chunkBy says that "predicate must be an equivalence relation,
that is, it must be reflexive (pred(x,x) is always true),
symmetric (pred(x,y) == pred(y,x)), and transitive (pred(x,y) &&
pred(y,z) implies pred(x,z)). If this is not the case, the range
returned by chunkBy may assert at runtime or behave erratically."
If you try to use your data with chunkBy!"a != b+1", it does not
work, as expected.
I think that my implementation could superseed the current one,
since it seems to work in a more generic way.
Andrea
