On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 19:23:48 +0200
"Jonathan M Davis" wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 19:10:53 monarch_dodra wrote:
>
> Ideally, only size_t would be allowed. Reality makes it so that we
> need ulong in some cases (e.g. iota). Given that fact, you'd ideally
> restrict it to size_t or ulong
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 20:45:36 David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 17:24:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
>
> wrote:
> > Yes. Unfortunately there are few, few cases in which size_t is
> > insufficient (e.g. an input range from a file or a large iota,
> > both on 32-bit builds)
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 18:45:24 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 17:24:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Yes. Unfortunately there are few, few cases in which size_t is
insufficient (e.g. an input range from a file or a large iota,
both on 32-bit builds). I perso
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 17:24:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Yes. Unfortunately there are few, few cases in which size_t is
insufficient (e.g. an input range from a file or a large iota,
both on 32-bit builds). I personally think these are too few to
need formal support.
I'd throw b
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 19:37:18 monarch_dodra wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 17:07:19 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
> > [SNIP]
>
> You know what, I think I have a better. Idea. All of this came up
> because I've had iota break my compiles WAY more often then I'd
> have liked. But I think
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 17:07:19 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
[SNIP]
You know what, I think I have a better. Idea. All of this came up
because I've had iota break my compiles WAY more often then I'd
have liked. But I think I know of another solution.
I think it would be nice if we enforc
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 19:08:59 Piotr Szturmaj wrote:
> Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > if length can be specifically ulong and the type is random access, then
> > its
> > indices will need to be ulong), so unfortunately, the situation is not so
> > simple that you can always assume size_t (even
On 10/2/12 1:07 PM, monarch_dodra wrote:
I don't know, forcing an implementer on size_t is pretty gratuitous.
Why can't he be free to choose his own index type?
Too much freedom can be detrimental (as is in this case).
Andrei
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 17:13:48 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 15:17:58 monarch_dodra wrote:
You might think "just use typeof(length)" BUT:
*you aren't even guaranteed that "typeof(length)" will be
correct! Certain ranges, such as iota, will return a length
usua
On 10/2/12 12:45 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:29:28 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On 2012-10-02, 18:09, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a range, you
may
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 19:10:53 monarch_dodra wrote:
> Given your stance of "I see _zero_ reason to support lengths or
> indices smaller than size_t" and "Types that do that are badly
> designed IMHO":
>
> Are you agreeing with my proposed type tightening? If anything,
> it weeds out the "ba
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:59:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 18:45:50 Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:29:28 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas
wrote:
> On 2012-10-02, 18:09, Peter Alexander wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarc
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 15:17:58 monarch_dodra wrote:
> You might think "just use typeof(length)" BUT:
> *you aren't even guaranteed that "typeof(length)" will be
> correct! Certain ranges, such as iota, will return a length
> usually of type uint, but be indexed with ulong... :/
> *Infinite r
Jonathan M Davis wrote:
if length can be specifically ulong and the type is random access, then its
indices will need to be ulong), so unfortunately, the situation is not so
simple that you can always assume size_t (even you should arguably be able
to).
It seems that isRandomAccessRange doesn't
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:48:34 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
Then don't create ranges that use ushort for indexing and
length. There's no need to.
To be clear, I'm suggesting that all random access ranges
should use size_t, and they will not be random access ranges if
they use anything
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 18:45:50 Peter Alexander wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:29:28 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
> > On 2012-10-02, 18:09, Peter Alexander wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>> If you've ever worked on a templat
monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:09:16 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a range, you
may have run into this problem: What is the type you should use to
index
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:44:48 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:09:16 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra
wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a
range, you may have run into this proble
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:44:48 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:09:16 UTC, Peter Alexander
wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra
wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a
range, you may have run into this proble
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:29:28 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:
On 2012-10-02, 18:09, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra
wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a
range, you may have run into this problem: What is the type
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:09:16 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a
range, you may have run into this problem: What is the type
you should use to index an RA range?
Forgiv
On 2012-10-02, 18:09, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a range, you
may have run into this problem: What is the type you should use to
index an RA range?
Forgive my ignorance. Wha
On Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 13:17:45 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a
range, you may have run into this problem: What is the type you
should use to index an RA range?
Forgive my ignorance. What's wrong with size_t?
If you've ever worked on a template that needs to index a range,
you may have run into this problem: What is the type you should
use to index an RA range?
The problem may not sound like much, but it is a royal pain in
the ass when trying to write "wrapper ranges", such as
std.algorithm.map.
24 matches
Mail list logo
