On Monday, 26 January 2015 at 16:13:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:26:04AM +0000, bearophile via Digitalmars-d wrote:Russel Winder:>but is it's name "group by" as understood by the rest of the >world?Nope...[...] I proposed to rename it but it got shot down. *shrug*
Andrei had a point about `partition` being used already. I liked Oliver's suggestion to go with slice-something. `sliceBy` might be worth considering. It even hints at the (efficient) implementation.
