Rationale for no opIndex, length in std.algorithm.map?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

dsimcha wrote:
> What is the rationale for lack of opIndex and length in map?  opIndex might be
> a bad idea if the function being mapped is expensive, but it's not so bad if
> the function is cheap.  Length just seems like a no-brainer to me if the
> underlying range has a length.  There are several places in various code I've
> written where I need to copy an arbitrary range, or some transform of it, to
> an array, and this obviously can be done more efficiently when the length is
> known in advance.  Were these just oversights, and should an enhancement
> request be filed, or is there a good reason for excluding them?

It's an oversight. map should offer opIndex and length iff the mapped 
range offers them.

Could you please bugzilla that?

Andrei

P.S. I appreciate the great work you're doing. Good going!