On 05/23/2016 08:17 AM, qznc wrote:
On Monday, 23 May 2016 at 12:01:52 UTC, qznc wrote:
Additionally, there is this weird special case for a bidirectional
range, which just adds unnecessary overhead. Is "remove dead code" a
good enough reason in itself for a PR?
Forget the "dead code comment" it is a actually a missing feature. In
the case the separator is a range and the input range is bidirectional,
the splitter result should be bidirectional as well. It is not, because
the implementation of back() and popBack() is missing, although some
bookkeeping code for it exists.
Most uses are forward, so perhaps it's best to eliminate the
bidirectional bookkeeping if it adds overhead, and confine those to a
separate function e.g. splitterBidirectional. There is precedent for
that in Phobos. -- Andrei
