Ideas for shortening "foreach_reverse" (was Re: I have a suggestion.)

[Regan Heath]

Justin C Calvarese Wrote:
> YonggangLuo wrote:
> > i think it's will be a good idea to replace "foreach_reverse" with  "frr".
> > "foreach_reverse" is too long as a keyword
> 
> I agree that foreach_reverse is way too long for a keyword. Also, it has 
> that unslightly underscore.
> 
> I think that frr is a little too short. Since it's a keyword that will 
> be rarely used, newcomers to D will likely get confused.
> 
> I'm "voting" for foreachrev, but here's a whole list of decent 
> alternatives to the current "foreach_reverse" mess:
> 
> 1. foreachrev
> 2. rforeach
> 3. revforeach

The operator overloads use _r for the reverse version so there is precedent to maybe reuse that here. eg.

opAdd and opAdd_r 

That said operator overloads never appear explicitly in code outside the class definition so the 'ugly' underscore never gets seen.

foreach and foreach_r

I don't personally find the underscore ugly in the above case when it's only followed by one letter 'r'.

Regan Heath