On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 18:48:51 UTC, Alex Parrill wrote:
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 18:23:57 UTC, HaraldZealot wrote:
I'm not sure how useful this is as opposed to plain pointers.
For structs, since `foo.bar` is the same as `(&foo).bar`, you
may as well use a pointer, and the only thing it saves for
numbers is a pointer deference or two.
I realized that for my initial purposes simple pointer simply
work, but when I'm trying make as possible universal template as
it can be, I discover that the main problem with direct operators
(and this touches not only numbers).
You say ranges are pass-by-value, but that's not entirely true.
Ranges themselves can be classes, or be made references via
std.range.refRange. Range elements can be made lvalues by using
ref functions [1].
Possible refRange is what I was looking for. Thanks.
As for the code:
* Your example usage (x = x += x = (x * 5)) is confusing, due
to the chained assignments.
This is special one of boundary cases, that clarify why is it so
complicated to create full-functional wrapper.
