On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <[email protected]> wrote: > You if you need to represent `<..` intervals in scientific computing, > that's a pretty compelling argument for supporting them. > >> I'd like to be able to represent any of those as >> Intervals-which-are-now-Ranges. It makes sense to do so because the >> things I want to do with them, such as clamping and testing if some >> value is contained, are exactly what Intervals-now-Ranges provide. >> Looking around, it seems many other languages provide only what Swift >> currently does, but Perl does provide `..`, `..^`, `^..`, and `^..^` >> (which, brought over to Swift, would be `...`, `..<`, `<..`, and >> `<.<`). > > Do we need fully-open ranges too?
I haven't encountered a need for open ranges, but I would expect that other applications in scientific computing could make use of them. I rather like Pyry's suggestions below. These would represent an expansive fleshing out of ranges. They really start pulling their weight for floating point bounds; of course, I'd wager that ... and ..< would still be the most used by far. _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
