On Tuesday, 16 October 2012 at 01:47:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
It should probably explain the rationale behind returning SortedRange so that it's much clearer as to why you'd want to use the return value rather than the original (now sorted) range.

+1

As it stands it's not at all clear from the documentation what the intention is, or how someone can go about sorting something without mutating it.

Thanks for the responses.

Reply via email to