a good point. The only drawback in this case is you are constructing
information you sometimes do not need or care about. If all you want is
whether it succeeded or not, then you don't need two ranges constructed
and returned. But therein lies a fundamental tradeoff that cannot be
avoided.
Christopher Wright:
> Just use two functions: find and contains.
Or better, define a built in operator, you may call it "in" :-)
'e' in "hello" => true
(The compiler may even cache the resulting position somewhere, so a successive
find can be very fast).
Bye,
bearophile
downs wrote:
Consider this type:
struct StringPosition {
size_t pos;
void opImplicitCast(out size_t sz) {
sz = pos;
}
void opImplicitCast(out bool b) {
b = pos != -1;
}
}
Wouldn't that effectively sidestep most problems people have with find
returning -1?
Or am I missing som
On Fri, 15 May 2009 10:30:17 -0400, grauzone wrote:
to return a pair struct, but still, what could be simpler than
returning an index? It's easy to construct the value you want (before
or after), and if you both multiple values, that is also possible (and
probably results in simpler code)
to return a pair struct, but still, what could be simpler than returning
an index? It's easy to construct the value you want (before or after),
and if you both multiple values, that is also possible (and probably
results in simpler code).
All what you can do with the index is
1. compare it ag
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:36:51 -0400, grauzone wrote:
downs wrote:
Consider this type:
struct StringPosition {
size_t pos;
void opImplicitCast(out size_t sz) {
sz = pos;
}
void opImplicitCast(out bool b) {
b = pos != -1;
}
}
Wouldn't that effectively sidestep most problems pe
downs wrote:
Consider this type:
struct StringPosition {
size_t pos;
void opImplicitCast(out size_t sz) {
sz = pos;
}
void opImplicitCast(out bool b) {
b = pos != -1;
}
}
Wouldn't that effectively sidestep most problems people have with find
returning -1?
Or am I missing som
On Fri, 15 May 2009 06:07:10 -0400, downs
wrote:
Consider this type:
struct StringPosition {
size_t pos;
void opImplicitCast(out size_t sz) {
sz = pos;
}
void opImplicitCast(out bool b) {
b = pos != -1;
}
}
Wouldn't that effectively sidestep most problems people have with
Consider this type:
struct StringPosition {
size_t pos;
void opImplicitCast(out size_t sz) {
sz = pos;
}
void opImplicitCast(out bool b) {
b = pos != -1;
}
}
Wouldn't that effectively sidestep most problems people have with find
returning -1?
Or am I missing something?
Of cou
