So I noticed something with the ranges in Kotlin.. If `..` and `..<` exists, why not`<..` and...

# random

[Jason Zhao]

So I noticed something with the ranges in Kotlin..

If .. and ..< exists, why not`<..` and <..<?

Currently if I write a >= b && a <= c the IDE will tell me to replace it with a in b..c
if I write a >= b && a < c then IDE will not recommend me with anything, but I can still write a in b..<c and this would be correct, though I'm not sure whether it's optimized by the compiler like the first case.
however, if I write a > b && a < c there is no way to represent it in ranges if I wanted to! I find this bit of inconsistency to be a little annoying.

Ideally all four operators should be present and optimized by the compiler.

[Pablichjenkov]

I really would love it to match the math operators

[ephemient]

https://kotlinlang.slack.com/archives/C09222272/p1677744365908819?thread_ts=1677741333.936509&cid=C09222272 https://kotlinlang.slack.com/archives/C09222272/p1677843745105539?thread_ts=1677741333.936509&cid=C09222272 https://kotlinlang.slack.com/archives/C09222272/p1677850589413519?thread_ts=1677741333.936509&cid=C09222272

[Alex Kuznetsov]

OTOH it would allow to implement algebra on ranges, such as +, -, * and such, similar to RangeMap in guava

[Alex Kuznetsov]

there are multiple uses for ranges besides just loops

[ephemient]

interval trees are cool but require a different data structure