On Saturday, 28 May 2016 at 01:48:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, May 27, 2016 23:42:24 Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote:
So what about the convention to explicitely declare a
`.transient` enum member on a range, if the front element
value can change?
Honestly, I don't think that supporting transient ranges is
worth it.
I have personally wondered if there was a case for a
TransientRange concept where the only primitives defined are
`empty` and `front`.
`popFront()` is not defined because the whole point is that every
single call to `front` will produce a different value.
