Sorry meant Concept == vTable less Interface
On Sunday, 24 March 2013 at 06:20:14 UTC, bls wrote:
That's why I think concepts are a good thing.
Container == vTable less Interfaces.
secure + documentation for free
On Sunday, 24 March 2013 at 03:55:35 UTC, Manu wrote:
I'd like to clarify some conflicts I've encountered.
TDPL talks about ranges, it mentions random access ranges
requiring these
functions:
T at(int i)
Range slice(int x, int y)
But most code I encounter rather implements:
T opIndex(size_t i)
Range opSlice(size_t x, size_t y)
Which is it? Is there a distinction? One approach is
deprecated?
Also, forward ranges require:
Range save()
But there is also this function:
Range opSlice()
With no args, handles the syntax 'range[]'. save() and
opSlice() with no
args would appear to be identical.
Why have both? Which will be used in which cases?
On 24 March 2013 13:03, Manu <turkey...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm trying to write some ranges with strictly controlled sets
of features,
but the docs on ranges are either very poor, or illusive (I
can't find any).
Suggest: Add a category under Language -> Language Reference
about ranges,
and all the stuff that defines their use/limitations. With
some examples.
I'm just copying from the std libs and hope I catch all the
details.
