Revised RFC on range design for D2

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"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).

You know my position ;)  But here are some things:

1. I like the new names of things much better.  This is a much prettier 
bicycle shed :)  And in this case, I think the bicycle shed is a little 
closer to the heart of the design than the nuclear reactor.  Maybe the core 
is better described as a bicycle shop :)

2. Saw this typo in the section on input range:

e=r.head Returns the element at the current position, which is of type 
ElementType!(R). In case ElementType!(R) has aliases (such as a reference, 
pointer, or array type), the **iterator** is free to recycle it it upon the 
call to r.next...

3. In output iterator (more bicycle shed stuff):

writing one object and moving to the next one are an organic operation

What's an organic operation?  I'm assuming it means 'coupled' like you can't 
do one without the other?  I've never heard that term before.

-Steve