Re: Re:[OT] std.bitarray

2009-09-19 Thread BCS
Hello Saaa, BCS, I'll keep to that convention in my next posts. thanks

Re: Re:[OT] std.bitarray

2009-09-18 Thread Saaa
BCS, Thanks for pointing that out. I'll keep to that convention in my next posts.

Re:[OT] std.bitarray

2009-09-18 Thread BCS
Could you /please/ include the "reply to" line in the text of your posts. Most clients seem to add it by default and it makes it much easier for people to find replies to there posts. (I have a filter set up to mark post with my username so, in my case I'd guess that without that line, I'm about

Re: std.bitarray

2009-09-18 Thread Saaa
Ah, slicing, of course, thanks! > Hello Saaa, > >> I understand a bitarray being faster than a boolean array as the first >> uses >> bitwise (hardware) operators. >> Is this a correct understanding of the situation? >> Why then is a boolean array not implemented in that way? > > Because you can'

Re: std.bitarray

2009-09-17 Thread BCS
Hello Saaa, I understand a bitarray being faster than a boolean array as the first uses bitwise (hardware) operators. Is this a correct understanding of the situation? Why then is a boolean array not implemented in that way? Because you can't slice a bit array the same way you can slice a int

std.bitarray

2009-09-17 Thread Saaa
I understand a bitarray being faster than a boolean array as the first uses bitwise (hardware) operators. Is this a correct understanding of the situation? Why then is a boolean array not implemented in that way? I expect there to be a good reason which I just don't know. I'd like to be able to b