Does D have too many features?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 5/2/12 6:15 AM, Tobias Pankrath wrote:
>
>>
>> No, it is not an O(1) operation, it is *close* to O(1) (as much sense
>> as that statement can make). I don't know why you associate any
>> particular complexity with 'in' in the first place. And I do think
>> we're crippling the language, considering Python (and probably other
>> languages) has had this feature since forever.
>>
>> I'm seriously worried. It seems to me like we're trying to cater to
>> people who can't reason about the types in their program and the
>> complexities of performing various operations on them. Since when did
>> algorithmic complexity become a reason to take away syntax sugar?
>
> +1
>
> I do argee. opIn is handy for arrays, too. That the complexity would be
> linear and thus it should be disallowed is not a valid argument in my
> opinion, because with the exact same argument you could kick
> std.algorithm.find out of phobos. It is just obvious to every trained
> programmer that finding an element in an unordered list takes O(n).

The problem here is making complexity an implementation detail of a 
uniform interface (e.g. over hashes and linear containers). That is fail.

Andrei