On 21.09.2017 17:53, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/21/17 11:48 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/21/17 11:06 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
foreach(i; 0 .. 4){
dfs(a + (i==0) - (i==1),
b + (i==2) - (i==3));
}
....
So am I, but I wasn't commenting on trade-offs, only the view that
there are no good uses.
This seems way easier for me to grok, and is how I would write it.
dfs(a + 1, 0); dfs(a - 1, 0);
dfs(0, b + 1); dfs(0, b - 1);
Of course, without bugs :)
...
It was the same bug in every copy. Impressive! ;)
dfs(a + 1, b); dfs(a - 1, b);
dfs(a, b + 1); dfs(a, b - 1);
-Steve
This is a good alternative, maybe arrange it like this:
dfs(a + 1, b); dfs(a, b + 1);
dfs(a - 1, b); dfs(a, b - 1);
Just need to make sure no code is duplicated. (For example, there could
be more work to do in each loop iteration, and then you'd need to use a
local function.)
