On 2014-03-27 16:33, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Thursday, 27 March 2014 at 15:54:46 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
On 2014-03-27 15:33, Meta wrote:
Is it even necessary to specifically have a binary version of that?
This seems to be a working generalization of binaryReverseArgs:
In binaryReverseArgs's defense, it was written before "Reverse!". But
yes, it's just a question of time before binaryReverseArgs is replaced.
It's just a matter of having someone tackle the issue and submit a
proposal *hint* ;)
Done:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2054
On the same note, binaryFun and unaryFun seem to me unnecessary
specializations of a more general 'fun' template. Philippe Sigaud has
an implementation in his dranges called naryFun
(https://github.com/PhilippeSigaud/dranges). That code has apparently
not been touched for at least two years, so YMMV.
Also yes, but the general feeling around here, is that "string
functions" are a thing of the past, and should be replaced by "real"
lambda functions.
As such, even if "naryFun" works, it promotes the use of something that
is unpopular, and that some would like to see disappear.
True.
--
Simen
