On Wednesday, 17 February 2016 at 11:30:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Feel free to create a pull request to add next. I don't know if
it would be accepted or not. I suspect that it mainly comes
down to whether such a simple function would be deemed worth
adding. On some level, it is a usability improvement, but in
theory, we'd prefer to be adding functions to Phobos which add
real value rather than simple wrappers that do basic stuff that
anyone can easily do. So, it may be accepted as a usability
improvement, or it may be rejected on the grounds that it's too
simple to be worth it. You won't know if you don't try though.
- Jonathan M Davis
Thanks a lot to you all for your input! It helped me to
understand D more :)
My use case is really about having `pop{Front,Back}` which
returns the popped element. I do understand that the current API
design is a lot more flexible and better [1] and there's no
objection at all from my side. However on the other side we learn
the stack syntax with return at university (it's even on
wikipedia [2]) and thus I am a friend of such a syntax:
auto myFile = ["<crazy header>","1","2"];
// cut off the header
myFile.next.writeln;
// do sth with the body
myFile.map!(to!int).map!"a +
1".map!(to!string).joiner(",").writeln;
Anyways I will try my best to submit a PR and we can continue to
discuss pros/cons there - imho it's an excellent learning task :)
[1]
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12206242/store-results-of-stdstack-pop-method-into-a-variable
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_(abstract_data_type)
