On 01/20/2016 04:22 PM, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
On Wednesday, 20 January 2016 at 17:16:00 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
This is one of those cases in which we were pedantically right to not
add them, but their equivalents look like crap.
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3942
As it seems related, let me share my personal experience with minPos.
Most of the time, I want one of the two things related to an extremum.
1. The minimum or maximum element itself. I write it as
a.minPos.front. That's almost fine, but maybe there is a more
expressive way?
Sadly, no. I'm very willing to add an overload of min and max for one
argument (which fortunately does not compile currently) to compute these
over a range. In fact literally today I wrote r.min and was surprised it
didn't work. Would you want to embark on that? Code, docs, unittests,
the works.
2. The index of minimum or maximum element, mostly using plain array as
a range. I write "a.length - a.minPos.length", and it looks completely
unintuitive. Additionally, when compiling to 64 bits, I usually still
want an int to use with other ints around (longs are overkill most of
the time), and the cast adds more clobber. Again, is there a better way
to express that?
No better way currently. We could add (min|max)Index but I like
(min|max)Pos quite a bit. They offer more flexibility for non-random
access ranges. For random access ranges you should soon be able to write
a.before(a.minPos).length, for a different kind of unintuitiveness :o).
Andrei
