4 ms·
Adding additional syntax to a language for this case seems bonkers to me. People can just write 0..10.
by mirsadm 11mo ago
Adding additional syntax to a language for this case seems bonkers to me. People can just write 0..10.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- dgrunwald 11mo agoIf you need `0..=n`, you can't write `0..(n+1)` because that addition might overflow.
- hgomersall 11mo agoI'm actually curious now how this is stored on `Range` in rust. I've certainly used ..= for exactly the reason you say, but as far as I'm aware `.end` on the range is the exclusive upper bound in all cases. What happens to `.end` in the overflowing case? Edit: it doesn't use Range for ..=, but rather RangeInclusive, which works fine.
- zygentoma 11mo agoIt's more meant for usage with variables: for i in 0..length { … } for i in 0..=maxindex { … }