On Tuesday, 4 October 2022 at 18:18:41 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
A related topic is how the "end slice" never loses that
capacity:
void main() {
auto a = [ 1, 2 ];
auto b = a;
assert(a.capacity != 0);
assert(b.capacity != 0);
b.length--;
assert(b.capacity == 0);
On Tuesday, 4 October 2022 at 18:18:41 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 10/4/22 10:59, Riccardo M wrote:
> The inherent reason for `remove` to cancel previous capacity
and
> requiring new allocations is exactly to prevent overwriting
data that
> could be owned by something else?
Yes.
A related
On 10/4/22 10:59, Riccardo M wrote:
> The inherent reason for `remove` to cancel previous capacity and
> requiring new allocations is exactly to prevent overwriting data that
> could be owned by something else?
Yes.
A related topic is how the "end slice" never loses that capacity:
void main()
On Tuesday, 4 October 2022 at 15:42:21 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Yes, you use `assumeSafeAppend`:
```d
arr.length--;
arr.assumeSafeAppend;
assert(arr.capacity != 0);
```
Now, I want to clarify that you should only use this if you are
sure you are done with the data you removed at the
On 10/4/22 11:22 AM, Riccardo M wrote:
Is it possible to remove elements from a range without losing its capacity?
```
void main()
{
import std.algorithm.mutation : remove, SwapStrategy;
import std.stdio : writeln;
int[] arr = [1, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2, 5, 2];
assert(arr.length ==
