On 07/19/2012 05:20 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Petr Janda <janda.p...@gmail.com
<mailto: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])));
^
return
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
