Challenge: write a reference counted slice that works as much as possible like a built-in slice

[Atila Neves]

On Thursday, 11 November 2021 at 16:09:46 UTC, Stanislav Blinov 
wrote:
> On Thursday, 11 November 2021 at 09:15:54 UTC, Atila Neves 
> wrote:
>
>> I have not yet encountered...
>> I think that...
>> I don't think this is a problem.
>> I wouldn't care about it either.
>> Me, ~99.9% of the time. I definitely don't miss...
>
> This all amounts to "I don't need it, therefore nobody should 
> either". That's not a very good metric.

I don't think that's an accurate description of what I wrote.

> It's 2021. Your footnote on "nobody" simply does not apply.

Agree to disagree.

>> My algorithm:
>> 1. Write code
>> 2. Did I notice it being slow or too big? Go to 4.
>> 3. Move on to the next task.
>> 4. Profile and optimise, go to 2.
>
> That's an interesting way of doing science. How would you 
> notice anything without a baseline, which you haven't even set 
> yet because you're not at (4)?

This is my opinion, not fact: if I didn't get to 4, then it 
doesn't matter (again, to me). I don't care if something runs in 
1us or 1ms*. I start caring when it's >20ms, because that's when 
I start noticing it.

* usually