+1 This is nice. Should make iterating over ML-style lists very natural. Not sure how you would write a closure for an array, could you post a sample for that?
-Rob On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sep 28, 2011, at 5:53 PM, Patrick Walton wrote: > > > On 9/28/11 5:27 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > >> On principle I do not want us to go down this path, even if we change > later. It adds risk that we won't change. It imposes a stateful model on > iterators where has_next and next must be coherent, and you have to write > two methos (not one as in Python or JS.next). And, Java. > > > > I'd be fine with a single-method solution too: iterators could just be a > closure that returns option::t, with none used to indicate the end of > iteration. > > Now you are talking. > > /be > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
