> for i in p1..<p2 by x
>
> as syntactic sugar for and internally mapped to
>
> for i in (p1..<p2).striding(by: x)
>
> Best of both worlds?
Look. It is very, very unlikely that you will get people to add syntactic sugar
*just* for striding and *just* for the for loop. If this:
for i in (1..<10).striding(by: 2) { … }
Is so ugly that we need special syntactic sugar for it, then so is this:
(1..<10).striding(by: 2).map { … }
That means we would need an expression along the lines of:
1..<10 by 2
Which could be used anywhere. Unfortunately, Swift does not allow word
characters in identifiers, so `by` as an operator is a non-starter. I can't
think of a non-letter operator for `by` that would make sense, so we're
probably not going to go that route, either (but if you have a
suggestion—preferably one backed by existing notation from, say, math—by all
means suggest it).
I don't think you're going to make anything happen here.
--
Brent Royal-Gordon
Architechies
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
