On 23/10/2009 18:29, bearophile wrote:
Yigal Chripun:
Ranges are already part of the compiler because of foreach, can we
also add language support for Range literals?
In both iota and other possible implementations I'd like the
arguments used by Python range/xrange, they are optimal, and better
than the currently ones used by iota.
And being ranges lazy and eager (strict) so common, I may want both
versions, so I don't need array(iota(...)) (all this is present in my
dlibs). What about xiota for the lazy version? Or maybe aiota for the
eager version? :-)
Bye, bearophile
Hell no. This is why I hate certain programming languages.
if you are trying to obfuscate the language than why not just define:
rtqfrdsg and fdkjtkf as the function names?
names are important and they must be readable (in English.
latin/greek/hindu/klingon/etc are not accepted). I don't care if I need
to type ten letters instead of just five if later on I can understand
immediately what the code does instead of spending half an hour reading
the (outdated) documentation if I even bothered to write one.
