> 2..4 => 2, 3 > 2...4 => 2, 3, 4 alternative syntaxes could be (:)
one could also have stepped ranges (inclusive or exclusive), let's say: 1:2:5 => 1, 3, 5 although this is not so practical for the compiler (I think that slices are kept through the pointer/length couple, so stepped slices would require a third variable and further complications) anyway, I won't come back again to this issue (and I hope to be able to keep my word). I saw it as an improvement. if the disturbing cost is greater that the improvement benefit, well. anyway.