foreach

[Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d]

On 6/12/2014 4:06 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:26:31 -0400, Nick Sabalausky
> <SeeWebsiteToContactMe at semitwist.com> wrote:
>>
>> While I agree on its triviality, I really doubt there's much "weight"
>> to speak of either. Hara probably could've already implemented and
>> tested this in the same amount of time any *one* of us have already
>> spent bikeshedding it.
>>
>
> I don't think it's as trivial as you imply. You have to use a symbol
> that's valid, but isn't used in the subsequent loop to avoid collisions.
>

Well, s/triviality/limited importance/

Slightly inaccurate word choice, whatever ;)