> Adding syntax sugar muddles this, and introducing another keyword
There is no new syntactic sugar nor there is a new keyword here though. It just changes how range works.
That being said, I'm not a fan of range having two modes of functionality. Perhaps it could just use an interface, now that we have generics it can be implemented on the existing supported types. And compiler can do whatever with it if it would be too slow.
There is no new syntactic sugar nor there is a new keyword here though. It just changes how range works.
That being said, I'm not a fan of range having two modes of functionality. Perhaps it could just use an interface, now that we have generics it can be implemented on the existing supported types. And compiler can do whatever with it if it would be too slow.