Transforming a range back to the original type?

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2012-05-04 09:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> Something like that could probably only be done if every range in the
> potentially large chain of wrapped ranges provided a means of getting at what
> type the previous one in the chain was, and very few ranges - if any - do
> that.
>
> However, I'm not quite sure what toCollection would buy you. Why does it
> really matter what type of container the range comes from originally given
> that you have to create a new container to put the elements of the range into
> such a container? And if you're putting the elements of a range in a new
> container, you can pick whatever container type you'd like, and since it has
> no real connection to the original container, I don't see why it would matter
> whether it was the same type of container. All you really need is the
> equivalent of std.array.array for whatever container you want to construct,
> and the container's constructor should provide that.

It's just like with the whole range idea, providing a common interface 
for iterating over a collection (and some other stuff). Here the idea is 
to have a common interface to transform the range back to a collection.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg