Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:49:21 +0200, Max Samukha wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:51:40 +0000 (UTC), dsimcha <dsim...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>== Quote from Max Samukha (spam...@d-coding.com)'s article
>>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:30:48 -0800, Walter Bright
>>> <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>> >Yigal Chripun wrote:
>>> >> what about foreach_reverse ?
>>> >
>>> >No love for foreach_reverse? <tear>
>>> And no mercy for opApply
>>
>>opApply **must** be kept!!!! It's how my parallel foreach loop works.
>>This would be **impossible** to implement with ranges. If opApply is
>>removed now, I will fork the language over it.
>
> I guess it is possible:
>
> uint[] numbers = new uint[1_000];
>
> pool.parallel_each!((size_t i){
> numbers[i] = i;
> })(iota(0, numbers.length));
>
> Though I agree it's not as cute but it is faster since the delegate is
> called directly. Or did I miss something?
Sorry for asking this stupid question but why was 'iota' chosen for that
purpose? I was kind of expecting that D2 would have these extension
methods which would allow writing '0.to(numbers.length)' by defining
'auto to(int begin, int end) { ... }'. I looked at wikipedia (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iota) and they seem to give credit for the Go
programming language which seems rather weird since they probably existed
in D long before Go was released. I've never heard of this APL being used
anywhere.
