I have a suggestion.
Pragma
ericanderton at yahoo.removeme.com
Wed May 16 08:18:22 PDT 2007
freeagle 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 find "frr" very cryptic.
>
> consider this:
>
> if(reverse)
> {
> frr(int i, array)
> {
> ...
> }
> }
> else
> {
> foreach(int i, array)
> {
> ...
> }
> }
>
> Those keywords doesn't seem related, but would in fact provide similar
> funcitonality.
>
> I too would like to see this "foreach_reverse" solved in other way, but
> not with another keyword
>
> freeagle
I agree with you completely. While I understand the goal behind "foreach_reverse" is to put optimal
array-traversal-loop generation in the hands of the compiler (read: faster than opApply), the keyword itself remains the
only real wart. The keyword "rforeach" would have made a much better candidate IMO.
--
- EricAnderton at yahoo
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list