on Tue Apr 05 2016, Stephen Canon <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> On Apr 5, 2016, at 3:22 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > on Tue Apr 05 2016, Erica Sadun > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Dave Abrahams > <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. I can't see any excuse for putting the smaller number on the right. If one really needs the numbers in that order, then I agree a stride free function is better. -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
