> On Apr 5, 2016, at 4:24 PM, Stephen Canon <sca...@apple.com> wrote: > >> On Apr 5, 2016, at 3:22 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >> >>> On Apr 5, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >>> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >>> >>> on Tue Apr 05 2016, Erica Sadun <swift-evolution@swift.org >>> <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Apr 5, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Dave Abrahams >>>> <dabrah...@apple.com <mailto:dabrah...@apple.com>> wrote: >>>> IMO this: >>>> >>>> (-9...0).reverse() >>>> >>>> is better than >>>> >>>> stride(from: 0, to: -10, by: -1) >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> The latter better reflects an author's actual intent. The former depends on >>>> implementation details, which can be hazy, especially, around the edge >>>> cases. It >>>> is quicker to read, understand, and verify that the latter is what is >>>> meant. >>> >>> Except that there seems to be some confusion over what "to:" means, right? >> >> obviously (0..<-10).by(-2) would be best. > > (0 ..> -10).by(-2)? > > Maybe having another range operator is overkill, but ..< seems pretty bonkers > here.
Suddenly SE-0051 is starting to look a lot more promising. https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0051-stride-semantics.md <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0051-stride-semantics.md> -- E
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
