Fun with range deprecations

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 12 August 2014 at 19:15:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> It does raise the question, though: should *all* range algos 
> that return
> range wrappers that optionally forward functionality like 
> forward range
> or bidirectional range functionality, be templatized? 
> Obviously, we must
> always expose an input range API since that's the minimum 
> functionality;
> but should all forward / bidirectional / random access / length 
> methods
> be templatized? Otherwise this story will just repeat itself in 
> the
> future, when something else needs to have, say, .length 
> deprecated, or
> .opIndex, etc..

I think it is ok to go with templatization as default deprecation 
handling approach but just changing all signatures for the sake 
of consistency is not worth it - not until you actually need to 
deprecate stuff.

Lets wait a few days if any new ideas appear on this topic and 
proceed with this solution.