Can we get rid of opApply?

[Max Samukha]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:08:03 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

>Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> "dsimcha" wrote
>>> foreach(char[] s; array) vs.
>>> foreach(char[] s; IntegersAsString(array))
>>>
>>> I think a lot of stuff is going to need some kind of extra struct like 
>>> this to
>>> make it work.  When this is the case, it needs to be possible to have a 
>>> default
>>> iteration method that "just works."  The opDot overload, I guess, could do 
>>> this,
>>> but it's a rather blunt tool, since then you can't use opDot for other 
>>> stuff and
>>> you'd have to forward _everything_ to the opDot object.
>> 
>> opRange doesn't help here.  array is a (non-extendable) primitive, so the 
>> compiler needs to be told how to convert integers to strings.
>> 
>> Even opApply wouldn't get you here.
>> 
>> I actually think something cool would be a toRange struct:
>> 
>> foreach(s; toRange!(string)(array))
>> 
>> Which would be like the to! template.
>> 
>> -Steve 
>
>With the new std.algorithm:
>
>foreach (s; map!(to!string)(array)) { ... }
>
>
>Andrei

I have to use an updated version of that algorithm:

1. Wake up

2. Get coffee

3. Read _all_ posts

4. Post only if necessary and think before posting