Deque impl.

[monarch_dodra]

On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 at 22:44:35 UTC, Robert Schadek wrote:
> On 01/29/2013 09:20 PM, monarch_dodra wrote:
>> 3. Nitpick: Don't use parenthesis for single arg templates:
>> No:  "Deque!(int)"
>> yes: "Deque!int"
> May I ask why? Both are correct after all. Or is it just the 
> preferred style?

It's just style, and a nitpick. Feel free to ignore it.

>> 5. Users expect "opSlice()" to produce an actual range. You 
>> are using it to deep copy the deck. This goes against your 
>> comment in regards to slicing an iterator. Just have your 
>> "opSlice()" do the same as what "range()" does, and get rid of 
>> "range()". This is the usage I'd expect:
>>
>> //----
>> Deque!int    de = ... ;
>> Iterator!int it = de[];
>> writeln(it);
>> //----
> I submitted a bug report for sort recently (9091 became 8368). 
> monarchdodra said (and pointed to source) that opSlice should 
> return the same type in respect to the called object.

Yes, 9071. I remember it quite well, and it was the first thing 
that came to mind the instant I saw your your code.

What I said is that for a *range* to offer correct *hasSlicing* 
primitive, then the "opSlice(size_t, size_t)" primitive must 
return the same type.

Deque is not a range though, Iterator is, and we're talking about 
the primitive "opSlice()"

Again: this is a Container vs Range issue.

For example, built-in arrays also have this scheme.

//----
//statarr is a static array. A container. statarr is NOT a range.
int[5] statarr = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4];

//dynarrX are ranges extracted from their container
int[]  dynarr1  = statarr[];
int[]  dynarr2  = statarr[1 .. 3];
//----

As you can see, "int[]" != "int[5]"