On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:32:10 -0500, Bill Baxter <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Justin Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Walter Bright
<[email protected]> wrote:
And here I was thinking perhaps opApply should just be dumped in
favor of
ranges.
I think the opApply should take precedence.
The only reason to define opApply is because foreach uses it.
Ranges on the other hand are useful in other situations.
--bb
Is is absolutely necessary for opApply to take a ref parameter? (I'm
asking
from D1 familiarity not D2 so question might not be relevant).
My understanding is that by taking a ref parameter there is an
additional
pointer dereference to get to the actual datum that is the subject of
current application. Of course the current regime does appear to allow
a
foreach to modify the items in the "container" being iterated over,
though
myself, I've only ever used foreach in readonly mode.
Making the delegate's arg "const ref" seems to work in D2.
And prevents writing to the argument, as expected.
It still requires an lvalue, which is not always convenient...
I have proposed an enhancement for this, see
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2443
-Steve
