On 03/19/2011 01:40 PM, Simen kjaeraas wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:05:59 +0100, spir <denis.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess something similar should be the base design of ranges. "Range of X"
could simply mean "lazy sequence of X", an on-demand array (lol); and that
would be the return type of every function returning a range. The complexity
(of filter-ing, map-ping, find-ind) could be hidden inside the object, not
exposed in the outer type.
Such a scheme precludes the usage of structs as ranges, though. It would
require virtual functions.
Oh, yes, seems you're right. Too bad.
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
