On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Petr Janda <janda.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
>> like what it does.
>>
>
> Not if "eliminating noise" equals to making things harder to understand.
>
> When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it is, a
> _function_ without name.
>
Nothing is stopping someone from being explicit with their types like that,
of course.
Here is the original code written in a way that is probably more familiar
to you:
auto r = map!((int x) { to!(string)(x); })(uniq(sort([5, 3, 5, 6, 8])));
Personally I find the original version to be much more readable but that
does require a basic knowledge of D's syntax. People coming from other
languages are free to use the more classic way if they wish. It's better
to learn idiomatic usage of a language, though, instead of forcing it to be
a language you are more comfortable in.
Regards,
Brad Anderson
