> On Jun 30, 2017, at 10:51 PM, Taylor Swift <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Perusing all the types and free functions in alphabetical order is so much
> easier than trying to guess what “topic” something is sorted under.
I’ve read that the above sentence three times, and I honestly can’t tell if
you’re being sarcastic or not!
I find the long web page version of the docs tedious to read. I use Dash (if
you have never tried it, I highly recommend it — seldom do I call any tool
indispensable, but dash and launchbar are on my very very short list of tools i
cannot live without) and it gives me such a nice compact view of the methods in
a sidebar, i can pretty easily find anything.
I thought about what someone posted, and almost replied last night, but didn’t
because this is a topic where people can become so entrenched and dogmatic.
But after some more thought:
> Or, in Swift 4:
>
> let shortID =
> String(longerDeviceID[longerDeviceID.index(longerDeviceID.endIndex, offsetBy:
> -2)…])
My reply being: in Python, i’m expressing exactly the same concept, but in a
very short form:
longerDeviceID[-2:] # which reads to me, start 2 before the end,
and go to the end.
which is exactly what
String(longerDeviceID[longerDeviceID.index(longerDeviceID.endIndex, offsetBy:
-2)…]) does.
The problem with this though is that there are THREE mentions of
longerDeviceID. So in Python i might write
getLongerDeviceID()[-2:]
but in Swift 4 i cannot easily inline this. Or can I? Is there a way of
writing something looks like
getLongergDeviceId()[<-2 from end> ... ]
where whatever goes in the <-2 from the end> does NOT refer to
getLongerDeviceID()? I.e. I want to talk about -2 from the end as a concept
without needing to refer to the specific string I’m talking about. If i could
generate an index concept without referring to the string itself in anyway, i’d
be happy. it’d be wonderful if i could express “-2 in whatever you feel like
is the natural unit for the string you’re operating on.”
Does the new API permit me to do that? If not, can I add my own subscript
functions which take a new type, and i’ll invent the concept of “index in
natural unit of the string being operated on.”
thanks.
>
> On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 12:54 AM, David Baraff <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 30, 2017, at 9:48 PM, Taylor Swift via swift-users
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Swift's strings were very deliberately designed this way. It's tougher to
>> get off the ground, sure, but it's better in the long run.
>>
>>
>> It probably is, but the correct idiom is not very well known, and sadly most
>> tutorials and unofficial guides are still teaching dumb ways of subscripting
>> into strings (or worse, falling back into NSString methods without
>> mentioning so) so the end result is people writing less performant code
>> rather than more performant code.
>
> An efficient solution doesn’t help if even experienced programmers can’t
> easily arrive at it. (I’m highly experienced, but I’ll admit I only put in
> about 5 minutes before I posted that. on the other hand, it shouldn’t take 5
> minutes to figure out something that simple with strings. still, maybe i
> would have done the simple “suffix()” thing had i been looking at the actual
> swift 4 api’s, but i only had swift 3 api’s in front of me.)
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-users mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users>
>
>
_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
