Jens Mueller:
Another option is to iterate using the foreach loop. Does not
look better either, does it?
...
myRange
.each!((e)
{
e.someOperation();
});
Adding something like each() has being proposed, but so far no
one has implemented it for Phobos.
But the need of each() is not strong, there are more important
functions to add, like a sum() (being implemented by Andrei), and
more.
Using foreach() is not bad, it shows clearly to the reader that
the code is doing something imperative. So it breaks the style of
the UFCS chains, but such breakage reflects the semantic breakage.
And the syntax of the each() you have written is a little less
readable than a foreach (unless the usage of jQuery and the like
has trained your eyes to not see them). One good thing of each()
is that it at the end of the chain, while you need to put foreach
at its start. This is not handy and it's enough to ask for a
each() in Phobos.
To improve the syntax of each() and make similar imperative
procedures look more like language constructs, some persons have
suggested an alternative syntax sugar for functions that have a
delegate as last argument:
myRange
.each {
e.someOperation;
};
Bye,
bearophile
