Okay, Still not sure how we can implement a range of strings. But since thats for a different feature, I'll leave that issue for now.
In the list you provided, all of the ones for positional slicing will definitely be implemented. Question: What would be the best name for this feature? I do like *positional slicing,* but I'm sure there are better names out there. Since it isn't exclusively array based, and is entirely based on the index position (not key), positional slicing makes sense, and allows for the future to have key slicing implemented with their own separate documentation pages provided and clear naming for the differences between them. On 20 March 2015 at 13:21, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > Alex Bowers wrote on 20/03/2015 13:10: > > $array['x':'z'] = []; // Remove all elements with keys between 'x' and >> 'z', inclusive > > > I believe i mentioned in the past about strings not being allowed for > ranges, since there is no real way to check this (and this appears to be by > key not by index) which should be a separate RFC thread, assuming this one > gets accepted to be expanded upon. > > > I'm carrying over my syntax from previous examples - [a:b] meaning a > key-based slice (which implies accepting string keys, because there's no > reason not to) vs [@a:b] meaning a positional slice. See my earlier mail on > the 6 different types of access - I do realise you're not planning to > implement them all, just playing with the implications of different > decisions if we carry them through consistently in the future. > > Regards, > -- > Rowan Collins > [IMSoP] >
