Ranges with length that cannot be named
SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.com
Wed Sep 25 18:09:28 UTC 2019
On 9/25/19 2:05 PM, berni wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 September 2019 at 17:03:07 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Also, there's a more productive view - instead of a classification of
>> ranges, think of "length" as an optional attribute of a range.
> On a more abstract level this is indeed a nice view. In case of iota
> though, I'm lost a little bit with this, especially the version with "if
> (isFloatingPoint!(CommonType!(B, E, S)))". Depending on B, E and S this
> might have a calculatable length or not. Should we omit length here
> altogether? If not, how to cope with the cases, where we cannot
> calculate it?
Yes, certain iota instantiations should not define length. For such
ranges, length is not expressible as a size_t, and that's okay. Just
manipulate it as any range with no known length.
More information about the Digitalmars-d