Revised RFC on range design for D2

[Pablo Ripolles]

Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:

> In wake of the many excellent comments and suggestions made here, I made 
> one more pass through the draft proposal for ranges.
> 
> http://ssli.ee.washington.edu/~aalexand/d/tmp/std_range.html
> 
> There are some comments in red illustrating some uncertainties (not 
> all), and the names of the primitives have been updated. Bicycle shed 
> galore! But don't forget to comment on the reactor as well :o).
> 
> 
> Andrei


Well, it looks prety clean! :D

However, I'm not completely sure I like these "head" and "toe" names selection.  It projects to much on it, doesn't it?  couldn't it be more neutral?  perhaps more conceptual?  I haven't been able to read the last days' comments... but my last impressions were that this "head" was not the best choice.

If "head" is the header item, why not call it "header"?

If ''toe" is the last item, why not call it "last"?

Other comment goes for the "done" property, for the seek of consistence shouldn't it better be named "isDone"?

Cheers!