On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:08:59 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
Huh? It didn't sound to me like it would get rid of anything, except
for the use of the word "index" in many methods that have to do with
index operations. That just seems confusing to me. I think the
opIndexXxxAssign functions may need to be added, but adding them by
overloading existing names doesn't seem a win to me.
--bb
That's a good point. But something is inherently problematic about name
explosion (In the proposed solution there is still an explosion in the
count of functions that need to be written.)
Now I realize there's also a need for opSliceXxxAssign, bleh. Unless we
ascribe a distinct type to a .. b.
Andrei
A distinct type for a..b is needed to support the mixed slicing and index
that occurs in Nd-array/Matrixes: i.e.
auto row0 = myMatrix[0,0..$];
