On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 22:12:10 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 22:11:03 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 01:04:01 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
We disagreed on this on irc, but I ask you to consider the
following which limits the code breakage a lot more than my
first proposal in chat:
[...]
Couldn't this even be made @nogc by just applying it to
eager()?
Very neat. I love it.
Err, everything but eager.
That would be inferred anyway, it's a template. But yes, `eager`
is strictly an add-on, it doesn't after @nogc-ness of the range.
