You are right, of course. It's just one of those minor cosmetic things you fix in a pre-1.0 version, or then maybe never. And it's good not to have too many of those.
Also for i ∈ 1:N just looks incredibly awesome. On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 1:38:57 PM UTC+1, STAR0SS wrote: > > I think people grossly exaggerate the "mental cost" of having both = and > in. It's really not that complicated, well explained in the docs and can > never cause bugs. > > On the other hand the depreciation cost will big quite large, given it > seems both are used 50/50. Plus the numerous complain posts on this forum. > Don't fix what's not broken. > > > >
