// So why shouldn't this work?
auto range = 0..10;
foreach (i; range) doScience(i);
Replace the first line with:
auto range = iota(0, 10);
and it will work. It's not *that* hard to learn, is it?
True, but I think the issue at hand when discussing "sugary"
syntax is clarity and expressiveness rather than completeness.
In many domains, programmer working memory is at a premium, and
code like this:
{
auto samples = meshgrid(iota(0, 2), iota(0, 100), iota(0,
100));
vector[StridedSlice(0, 10, 2)] = iota(1, 6);
plot(iota(-10, 10), myFunction(iota(-10, 10)));
foreach (i; square(iota(0, 10))) performSquareDance(i);
}
might not be as respectful of that resource as code like this:
{
auto samples = meshgrid(0..2, 0..100, 0..100);
vector[(0..10).by(2)] = 1..6;
plot(-10..10, myFunction(-10..10));
foreach (i; square(0..10)) performSquareDance(i);
}
Reference for `meshgrid`:
http://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/meshgrid.html
Reference for strided indexing:
http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/user/basics.indexing.html
On Friday, 14 March 2014 at 14:36:29 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:29:34PM +0000, bearophile wrote:
Mason McGill:
>My concern is that this design may be ignoring some of the
>lessons
>the SciPy community has learned over the past 10+ years.
Thank you for your help. An injection of experience is quite
important here. Julia is far newer than D, and yet it has
already a
better design and more refined implementation in several things
related to numerical computing.
>// So why shouldn't this work?
>auto range = 0..10;
>foreach (i; range) doScience(i);
People have suggested this lot of time ago, again and again.
So I
ask that question for Walter.
[...]
Replace the first line with:
auto range = iota(0, 10);
and it will work. It's not *that* hard to learn, is it?
T
