On 02/09/2011 01:54 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"spir"<denis.s...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1423.1297254917.4748.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
PS: your proposal would also logically allow, I guess, expressions like (n
in min..max). Would love it.
Unfortunately, not unless "in" was changed to allow "{expr} in {range}". And
from prior discussions of "in", I seem to remember Walter and Andrei are
strongly against allowing "in" to be used to check for element values rather
than just AA keys.
But Andrei did recently propose an "any", IIRC, that would allow something
like what you're suggesting.
IIRC, they did not argue against it for ranges specifically, but for it beeing
O(n) for conceptually sequential collections like plain arrays, unlike for AAs,
thus misleading in terms of efficiency. But 'in' is O(1) for an interval ;-)
So, there is no reason to disallow it, instead such a feature would be both
obvious & useful.
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
