On 2011-02-11 19:55:05 -0500, bearophile <bearophileh...@lycos.com> said:
I am not going to invent a new wonderful name for it, sorry :-) My
votes, in decreasing order of preference:
1) By far, a syntax like a..b:c, or missing that, a syntax like a..b
No one noticed yet that the a..b:c syntax causes ambiguity? Tell me,
how do you rewrite this using the new proposed syntax:
auto aa = [iota(a, b, c): 1, iota(d, e): 2];
3) If you refuse the word "range", then my third choice is "interval".
It's as cleas as range, but it's a bit worse because it's longer.
Interval is clear only as long as there's no step value mentioned.
Having a step value is quite a stretch from the usual notion of an
interval.
I like a lot so's suggestion "walk". I'm not sure it's much clearer
than iota though.
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/
