On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 08:37:08PM -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Tuesday, May 15, 2012 09:48:23 H. S. Teoh wrote: > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 07:47:24PM +0400, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: > > > On 15.05.2012 19:32, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > > >On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 05:14:15PM +0200, ref2401 wrote: > > > >>general question: > > > >>-std.file, > > > > > > > >std.file is badly named. It really deals with the _filesystem_, > > > >that is, pathnames, etc.. It doesn't deal with individual files. > > > > > > Bleh, std.file.read does just that - reads entire file into > > > memory. In essence std.file works with filesystem and files, and > > > unit of work is a file. > > > > [...] > > > > OK, that is totally deserving of a WAT. The split between std.file, > > std.stdio, std.stream, etc., are just soooo illogical. I'm hoping > > that std.io will eventually clear up this crazy mess, but I suspect > > std.file will still remain. Is there any logical reason why we > > shouldn't rename it to std.filesystem or std.fs? Calling it std.file > > is needlessly confusing, esp. given that most of the functions > > actually concerned with file I/O are in std.stdio (or the future > > std.io). > > std.file operates on files. I don't see anything wrong with it. [...]
Hindsight is always 20/20. I agree with you that it makes sense... but only after you've learned what it is. This does not help newcomers nor give them a good impression of D. We need to reduce the amount of stuff that only makes sense after the fact, especially when there's no good reason to do so. T -- In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
