On 07/19/2012 08:03 AM, Petr Janda 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.
Others beat me to it but the anonymous function can be written more
completely as
function string(int x) { return x.to!string(); }
(Or 'delegate' depending on the situation.)
Allow me to add a take(..., 2) to the entire expression, which is to me
the strongest reason why UFCS can be great:
writeln(take(map!(function string(int x) { return x.to!string();
})(uniq(sort([5, 3, 5, 6, 8]))), 2));
The problem is, the 2 is related to take() but they are too far apart
above. UFCS puts them together:
a_long_expression.take(2)
I don't like UFCS everywhere but it is very helpful in many cases.
Ali
