On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Petr Janda <janda.petr@gmail.com> wrote:
It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.
When you say (int x) { return x; } it's clear about what it is, a _function_ without name.
Nothing is stopping someone from being explicit with their types like that, of course.
Here is the original code written in a way that is probably more familiar to you:
auto r = map!((int x) { to!(string)(x); })(uniq(sort([5, 3, 5, 6, 8])));
Personally I find the original version to be much more readable but that does require a basic knowledge of D's syntax. People coming from other languages are free to use the more classic way if they wish. It's better to learn idiomatic usage of a language, though, instead of forcing it to be a language you are more comfortable in.
Regards,
Brad Anderson