On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 05:24:26AM +0000, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 01:04:01 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > >Moreover, with this, some old code will *automatically* be upgraded > >to laziness without needing to change at all too. Tell me that > >doesn't at least tempt you! > > I very much like this approach. I don't know that it'll work in the > general case with the rangification of Phobos functions that don't > currently return ranges, but in each case that it does work, it'll > remove the need for distinguishing between function names, and it may > allow us to make them completely lazy later - especially if some of > what Walter was discussing at dconf with regards to automatically > converting ranges to arrays when appropriate was implemented (e.g. > when the range was assigned to an array). > > And even better, every time that we go with this approach, we remove a > bike shedding debate. :) [...]
Whoa. Adam, you just blew my mind. *This* would be what I call effective use of the current language! A solid +1 from me. T -- Unix was not designed to stop people from doing stupid things, because that would also stop them from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn
