On Friday, 3 May 2024 at 15:19:13 UTC, user1234 wrote:

import std.stdio : writefln;

void main() {
    auto arr = [
        [5, 15],      // 20
        [2, 3, 2, 3], // 10
        [3, 6, 2, 9], // 20
    ];

    foreach (i, row; arr)
    {
        double total = 0.0;
        foreach (e; row)
            total += e;

        auto avg = total / row.length;
        writefln("AVG [row=%d]: %.2f", i, avg);
    }
}

foreach (const size_t i, row; arr)

even better:

foreach (const typeof(arr.length) i, row; arr)

Otherwise I respect your POV, it's just that here I have no problem with the way that works. I dont see any issue with the type system. D type system is static, strong, but optionally inferred. And that's it.

Well all these proposals to int index like size_t and const typeof(arr.length) are cryptic and less readable and less straightforward in comparison to how it used to be. Feels like horrible decision if the language is suppose to be somewhat futureproof. The int was simple, straighforward and great. These suggestions feel like some C++ all over again.

A horrible alternative would be to use alias on size_t to make up a new pseudo-type that is more aligned with the code logic.

alias integer = size_t;
import std.stdio : writefln;

void main() {
    auto arr = [
        [5, 15],      // 20
        [2, 3, 2, 3], // 10
        [3, 6, 2, 9], // 20
    ];

    foreach (integer i, row; arr)
    {
        double total = 0.0;
        foreach (e; row)
            total += e;

        auto avg = total / row.length;
        writefln("AVG [row=%d]: %.2f", i, avg);
    }
}