# A view() with indices omitted?

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-view-with-indices-omitted/4158
**Category:** Internals & Design
**Created:** [June 8, 2017, 2:17am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-view-with-indices-omitted/4158 "2017-06-08T02:17:53Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![JeffreySarnoff](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/jeffreysarnoff/32/1980_2.png) [@JeffreySarnoff](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/JeffreySarnoff)
#### Post date: [June 8, 2017, 2:17am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-view-with-indices-omitted/4158/1 "2017-06-08T02:17:53Z")

</div>

It would be convenient to allow `view(A)` for view `A` in its entirety.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![mbauman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mbauman/32/31082_2.png) [@mbauman](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mbauman)
#### Post date: [June 8, 2017, 3:31am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/a-view-with-indices-omitted/4158/2 "2017-06-08T03:31:37Z")

</div>

Currently, `view` is modeled after `getindex`. As such `view(A)` should correspond to `getindex(A)` or `A[]`. I’ll admit that the utility there is rather low (and it currently is buggy), but this correspondence is quite important for the `@view` and `@views` macros.