Does Volta need foreach_revese?

[voltlang]

Does Volta need foreach_revese?

[Dav1dde]

We did actually discuss this yesterday on IRC (and before a while back). Some kind of reveresed() will be there at some point, but simply doesn't work yet (no iterators/ranges or similiar). foreach_reverese is gonna stay for now, simply because it is a lot cleaner than doing it manually with a C for.

[bubnenkoff]

I do not think that it's good idea to downgrade languages futures only because you want to be C-compatibility. A lot of people need simple hight level language for hight level task, that do not need to have low-level access.
Who need C/C++ may use D, that done a lot of work in this direction. I do not see reasons to cpend time to it. One of thing that I do not like in D -- it become so complex and it's core developers spend a lot of time to low-level stuff.

[Dav1dde]

Did you read what I wrote? Where is there a downgraded 'future'?

[bubnenkoff]

Sorry, look like I misunderstand part: "because it is a lot cleaner than doing it manually with a C for".
So there is chance to improving it's later?

[Dav1dde]

Yes. But this needs to be further discussed, Jakob brought up some good points for foreach_reverese, but right now it is not worth removing it anyways.

[Wallbraker]

There are a whole bunch of issues that needs to be investigated with a ranged base reverse. Like for instance the actual instructions that they get lowered down into.

We can reevaluate foreach_reverse at a later time, right now they are here to stay for the foreseeable future.