On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
: Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary.
: Does it buy us enough over +1 and -1?
Well, that was my first thought, but...
: Proposed Now
:
: 1..10 1..10
: 1..^10 1..9
: 1..^$x 1..$x-1
: 1^..10 2..10
: $x^..10 $x+1..10
: 1^..^10 2..9
: $x^..^$y $x+1..$y-1
:
: I mean, for what it is, I do like the syntax, but is it useful enough to
: warrant the extra cognitive load it brings with it?
I think it helps a lot as soon as you get outside the realm of
integers. And I think it helps a lot with integers too. It seems
like you just want 0..^$size all the time in any C-derived language.
I don't think it's just Ruby envy...
In general, for any type, how do you write
[$min .. $max - $step : $step]
when you don't even necessarily have subtraction defined? We don't know
how to do "z" - 1 in Perl 5, for instance.
Larry
