On Wed, 16 May 2012 16:38:54 -0400, Artur Skawina <art.08...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 05/16/12 22:15, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I still don't get the need to "add" this to ranges. The streaming API
works fine on its own.
This is not an argument against a streaming API (at least not for me),
but
for efficient ranges. With the API above I can shift tens of gigabytes of
data per second between threads. And still use the 'std' range API and
everything that works with it...
But you never would want to. Don't get me wrong, the primitives here
could work for a streaming API (I haven't implemented it that way, but it
could be made to work). But the idea that it must *also* be a std.range
input range makes zero sense.
To me, this is as obvious as not supporting linklist[index]; Sure, it can
be done, but who would ever use it?
-Steve
