On 10.10.2011 20:03, Norbert Nemec wrote:
On 10.10.2011 07:34, Don wrote:
On 10.10.2011 04:41, kenji hara wrote:
2011/10/10 bearophile<[email protected]>:
So is this:
y[$-6, 0..$:2]
Translated like this?
y.opIndex(y.opDollar!0 - 6, y.opSlice!1(0, y.opDollar!1, 2))
I have no thought about it.
I'm not sure that the additional stepping is really useful, but I
think adding it into syntax is not impossible -- it might not conflict
with associative array literal.
Kenji Hara
Personally, I think that since strided operations are so inefficient,
they should remain ugly.
Inefficient?! For multidimensional arrays, all but one dimension have
non-trivial, runtime-dependent strides anyway.
The problem is with built-in arrays.
Anyway, the expressiveness gained by strides is significant and the
effort to allow it in the language is minimal.
That's true, IF you are happy to have it as a feature which can only be
used in user-defined types. If you want it apply to built-in arrays as
well, the effort is immense.
