on Tue Apr 05 2016, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu-AT-gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Dave Abrahams <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> on Sat Apr 02 2016, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu-AT-gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> [snip] >>> >>> Not included: >>> 1. I know Ranges are in flux, so I've held off on extending Range with >>> a striding(by:) method in this proof-of-concept. >> >> They're not in flux, except for not having been reviewed yet; they are >> settled in the swift-3-indexing-model branch. > > Did not know that. Will have to study what's there in more detail. > >>> 2. No attempt at the suggested stride(from:to:steps:) quite yet. >> >> #1 and #2 are mutually exclusive; we prefer #1 as it removes questions >> about the meaning of "to" or "through." > > I wasn't aware that was the thinking. Limiting strides to > `striding(by:)` removes the ability to express `stride(from: 0, to: > -10, by: -1)`
IMO this: (-9...0).reverse() is better than stride(from: 0, to: -10, by: -1) What do you think? -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
