Re: std.range.put vs R.put: Best practices?

2017-08-21 Thread Jon Degenhardt via Digitalmars-d-learn
On Monday, 21 August 2017 at 05:58:01 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Monday, August 21, 2017 02:34:23 Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: On Sunday, 20 August 2017 at 18:08:27 UTC, Jon Degenhardt wrote: > Documentation for std.range.put >

Re: std.range.put vs R.put: Best practices?

2017-08-21 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
On Monday, August 21, 2017 02:34:23 Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: > On Sunday, 20 August 2017 at 18:08:27 UTC, Jon Degenhardt wrote: > > Documentation for std.range.put > > (https://dlang.org/phobos/std_range_primitives.html#.put) has > > > > the intriguing line: > >> put should not

Re: std.range.put vs R.put: Best practices?

2017-08-20 Thread Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-learn
On Sunday, 20 August 2017 at 18:08:27 UTC, Jon Degenhardt wrote: Documentation for std.range.put (https://dlang.org/phobos/std_range_primitives.html#.put) has the intriguing line: put should not be used "UFCS-style", e.g. r.put(e). Doing this may call R.put directly, by-passing any

std.range.put vs R.put: Best practices?

2017-08-20 Thread Jon Degenhardt via Digitalmars-d-learn
Documentation for std.range.put (https://dlang.org/phobos/std_range_primitives.html#.put) has the intriguing line: put should not be used "UFCS-style", e.g. r.put(e). Doing this may call R.put directly, by-passing any transformation feature provided by Range.put. put(r, e) is prefered.