• ref2401 (13/13) Nov 30 2015 It seems like `std.algorithm.each` is not executed in the example
• ref2401 (2/2) Nov 30 2015 DMD 2.069.1
• visitor (8/10) Nov 30 2015 in a multiline statement, i believe you must use :
• anonymous (5/6) Nov 30 2015 ref2491's original code is valid, but doesn't have the intended meaning....
• visitor (2/10) Nov 30 2015 Ok, Thanks ! :-)
• ref2401 (2/9) Nov 30 2015 Got it. Thank you)

ref2401 <refactor24 gmail.com> writes:

It seems like `std.algorithm.each` is not executed in the example 
below.
Could anyone tell why?
Thank you.


import std.algorithm;

void main(string[] args) {
	int[] arr = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];

	arr.each!((ref e) => {
		writeln(e); // does not print
		++e;
	})();

	writeln(arr); // prints [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
}

ref2401 <refactor24 gmail.com> writes:

DMD 2.069.1
OS Win8.1 Enterprise

visitor <visitor gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 09:56:08 UTC, ref2401 wrote:
 DMD 2.069.1
 OS Win8.1 Enterprise

in a multiline statement, i believe you must use :
arr.each!((ref e) {
     writeln(e);
     ++e;
})
"=>" is for oneliner

though i don"t understand why it fails silently ??

anonymous <anonymous example.com> writes:

On 30.11.2015 11:50, visitor wrote:
 though i don"t understand why it fails silently ??

ref2491's original code is valid, but doesn't have the intended meaning. 
`e => {foo(e);}` is the same as `(e) {return () {foo(e);};}`, i.e. a 
(unary) function that returns a (nullary) delegate. Calling it does not 
run foo. In contrast, calling this runs foo: `e => foo(e)`.

visitor <visitor gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 12:03:08 UTC, anonymous wrote:
 On 30.11.2015 11:50, visitor wrote:
 though i don"t understand why it fails silently ??

 ref2491's original code is valid, but doesn't have the intended 
 meaning. `e => {foo(e);}` is the same as `(e) {return () 
 {foo(e);};}`, i.e. a (unary) function that returns a (nullary) 
 delegate. Calling it does not run foo. In contrast, calling 
 this runs foo: `e => foo(e)`.

 `e => {foo(e);}` is the same as `(e) {return () {foo(e);};}`

Ok, Thanks ! :-)

ref2401 <refactor24 gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 12:03:08 UTC, anonymous wrote:
 On 30.11.2015 11:50, visitor wrote:
 though i don"t understand why it fails silently ??

 ref2491's original code is valid, but doesn't have the intended 
 meaning. `e => {foo(e);}` is the same as `(e) {return () 
 {foo(e);};}`, i.e. a (unary) function that returns a (nullary) 
 delegate. Calling it does not run foo. In contrast, calling 
 this runs foo: `e => foo(e)`.

Got it. Thank you)