On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:47 AM, bearophile <[email protected]> wrote: > Bill Baxter: > >> > I believe (without having measured... which means that I am essentially >> > lying) that we can safely assume the lunch will be free or low cost. The >> > copying of the underlying range should be cheap except for the shortest >> > ranges. > > Using array(xmap()) in my dlibs calls the opApply of the xmap, this is > measurably slower than using map(), so I keep both. I keep both also because > it's handy to have both. > > >> Another commonly used func from Python is zip(). Not sure if that one >> is doable in D because it relies heavily on Python's tuples to work, >> but in Python it offers a very clean solution to iterating over >> several lists at once. > > Take a look at azip, zip and xzip in my dlibs. > > >> Also I really hope we'll be seeing lazy versions of the associative >> array properties .keys and .values! > > Take a look at xkeys and xvalues of my dlibs. > > My interest for this community and for D is decreasing quickly.
It should be the opposite, no? It's looking like we're finally getting a way to implement those things you've had in your libs *efficiently* in D, without having to go through the slow opApply pathway. I would think you'd be jumping up and down for joy, not leaving the community. --bb
