On 11/8/2012 8:18 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 9 November 2012 at 03:45:11 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
the *one* thing I hate about D ranges is that they don't force you to
explicitly say "Yes, I *intend* this to be an InputRange" (what are we, Go
users?).
Just a note, of course it still wouldn't *force*, but maybe it'd be a good habit
to start writing this:
struct myrange {...}
static assert(isInputRange!myrange);
It'd be a simple way to get a check at the point of declaration and to document
your intent.
Interestingly, we could also do this if the attributes could run through a
template:
[check!isInputRange] struct myrange{}
@attribute template check(something, Decl) {
static assert(something!Decl);
alias check = Decl;
}
Many algorithms (at least the ones in Phobos do) already do a check to ensure
the inputs are the correct kind of range. I don't think you'll get very far
trying to use a range that isn't a range.
Of course, you can always still have bugs in your range implementation.
