On 12/12/2010 02:03 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
foobar wrote:
D basically re-writes foreach with opApply into the ruby version
which is why Ruby is *BETTER*
You missed the point: there is no "Ruby version". They are the
same thing.
foreach to me is a redundant obfuscation
How can it be redundant? It's got the same elements the same
number of times.
rofl.copter.each |lol|
spam
end
foreach(lol; rofl.copter)
spam
Same elements, just reordered.
I don't know about the each() method itself. I've never written
one, but I suspect it is virtually identical to opApply too.
Similar. In ruby you have the yield keyword. Here's the D example:
class Foo
{
uint array[2];
int opApply(int delegate(ref uint) dg)
{ int result = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++)
{
result = dg(array[i]);
if (result)
break;
}
return result;
}
}
Here's the same code written in ruby
class Foo
def each
yield @array[0]
yield @array[1]
end
end
So pretty similar, right? :-P
D should provide a yield keyword that basically rewrites the body of the
method into the first code. What's that "if (result) break;"? That's
showing the implementation of foreach. Why do I have to rememebr the
result of dg? What's that? What if I forget it? I just want to yield two
elements :-(
