On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 18:34:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 18:01:53 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 4/7/15 2:16 PM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 08:58:57 UTC, ixid wrote:
Or to be more consistent with UFCS:
foreach (name; names.parallel) {
name.writeln;
}
no.please
wat
unreadable.is.ufcs.using.over
UFCS doesn't give you yoda speak. It's more consistent to use it
for single as well as multiple function chains and it's cleaner.
Some users' distaste for UFCS cramps D's developing its own
consistent idiomatic approach. Do you have any argument for your
dislike that isn't just personal preference? You're fine with
names.parallel but for some reason balk at name.writeln?
