https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9106
Ivan Kazmenko <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #8 from Ivan Kazmenko <[email protected]> 2014-03-22 08:14:10 PDT --- Initially, I would have been against the renaming. The main argument would be that what we have now is consistent as a set of randomization functions operating on ranges, and consistent with use in other languages. For example, wouldn't it be inconsistent to rename some of the functions (shuffle and sample) but not others (randomCover)? But then, a quick search on modern languages revealed they favor the shorter shuffle/sample names. For example, C++ has a legacy random_shuffle but a modern C++11 shuffle for use with C++11 RNGs. Python has shuffle and sample. Java has shuffle. So, the second part of my argument is no longer valid. So, for me, the problem reduced to whether randomCover could use a wholly different, better name. So, how is this function called in other languages? By the way, randomCover is terribly inefficient as of DMD 2.065.0 (quadratic in total), is that addressed somehow in random2? I have a linear-time approach with an associative array in mind, but that would mean reallocating when the AA grows, which is something to avoid for Phobos code, right? Ivan Kazmenko. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
