"Manu via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
It gets awkward when you nest, using '_' leads to '__',
i,j,k,etc work just fine. Are you really nesting your loops that deeply?
and
personally, I would expect an 'unreferenced variable' warning for the
unused loop counter. I like warnings hassling me about unused
variables.
This is a good point.
I also object to the inconsistency with for(;;). Recall Scott Myers
talk...
Should we also allow "foreach(;)" ? 'for' being so loose is not necessarily
something we want to copy.
It's theoretically an optimisation too; capturing front may be a
costly operation that's not required. Ranges maintain their counters
internally, there's no reason to emit code to capture a local copy of
'front' if it's not used. popFront and empty don't imply a byVal copy,
they usually just update range counters.
The compiler's optimizer will do that just fine.
