On 3/16/21 8:49 AM, Per Nordlöw wrote:
I find myself writing
foreach (_; 0 .. n)
doSomething(); // no using the variable `_`
.
What about relaxing the syntax to allow
foreach (; 0 .. n)
and/or
foreach (0 .. n)
?
Thereby making the `ForeachTypeList` of `AggregateForeach` in the
grammar rule [1] optional.
[1] https://dlang.org/spec/statement.html#foreach-statement
Meh, is this a common need though? The first form isn't terrible.
In general, I'd say it would be nice to designate _ as an unused
variable (i.e. not allowed to access it, and it doesn't trigger
shadowing errors). It's like this in Swift for instance.
-Steve
