Alright. Does this mean that we can otherwise assume that collections share
indices with their subsequences? It might be worth documenting, one way or the
> On 14 Oct 2016, at 02:40, Hooman Mehr <hoo...@mac.com> wrote:
> This is a bug reported multiple times in different forms. My version of it
> is: SR-1487 <https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1487>.
> It remains open because it is not easy to fix with the existing design of
> String. Apparently core standard library team are working on an overhaul of
> String to address this and other usability and performance issues.
>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 5:12 PM, Tim Vermeulen via swift-users
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>> wrote:
>> Is it a requirement that collections share indices with its subsequence?
>> Array and ArraySlice do share indices, which is why ArraySlice isn’t
>> zero-based, and I think this is convenient. But String.CharacterView doesn’t
>> seem to share indices with its subsequence (which is String.CharacterView as
>> well). Consider this example:
>> let foo = "foobar".characters
>> let index = foo.index(foo.startIndex, offsetBy: 3)
>> let bar = foo.suffix(from: index) // "bar"
>> foo[index] // "b" :)
>> foo[bar.startIndex] // "f" :(
>> So does this mean that we can’t assume that collections and their
>> subsequences share their indices (which could be very handy), or is this
>> just a bug related to String.CharacterView?
>> swift-users mailing list
>> firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>
swift-users mailing list