[swift-evolution] Feature proposal: Range operator with step

[Dave Abrahams]

on Mon Mar 28 2016, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

> D'oh! Of course, that sounds great. Would it require you to do something
> else to cover your example with UnsafePointers though?

Nope; it Just Works™

> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 4:56 PM Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> on Mon Mar 28 2016, Erica Sadun <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>
>> >> On Mar 28, 2016, at 3:25 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution
>> >> <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> on Mon Mar 28 2016, Xiaodi Wu
>> >
>> >> <swift-evolution at swift.org
>> >> <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Right, Countable could refine Strideable. I'm no expert on this, but
>> >>> some cursory reading suggests that the analogous feature in C++ simply
>> >>> requires the type to have operator++ defined. Obviously, that won't
>> >>> work for Swift 3.0...
>> >>
>> >> Hmm, instead of defining a new protocol (Countable), what if we just use
>> >> “Strideable where Stride : Integer” as a constraint?
>> >
>> > I like a differentiation between continuous and discrete things
>> > although both can have ranges, membership, fences,
>> > and a way to stride through them
>>
>> Strideable where Stride : Integer expresses just exactly that.  Now if I
>> could only get the type-checker to cooperate...
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > -- E, just musing, not passing judgement on names
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > swift-evolution mailing list
>> > swift-evolution at swift.org
>> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>>
>> --
>> Dave
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>>

-- 
Dave