On Saturday, 28 December 2013 at 13:03:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Saturday, 28 December 2013 at 11:58:48 UTC, Jakob Ovrum
wrote:
This is a terrible example - in D it's generally accepted that
such a `length` function should NOT be provided at all.
Correction: in the D-community it is generally accepted.
No.
I have *no* idea where you got this idea from. D and its standard
library follows in the footsteps of STL when it comes to the
algorithmic complexity of primitives, and this has been an
important tenet from *at least* the early days of D2. A few
examples include std.container's maximum complexity requirement
for primitives (including `length`) and the existence of
std.range.walkLength. A recent example of enforcement includes
the rejection of adding binary `in` functionality for
non-associative arrays.
@disable and (@obsolete) etc can safely be ignored for a sound
program, it is a hint for the compiler to check the integrity
of the logic, but it does not affect the semantics of a sound
program.
You could say this about any restriction in the type system.
(`@obsolete`? Did you mean `deprecated`?)
