On 6/9/15 1:56 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 6/9/15 4:40 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Tuesday, 9 June 2015 at 17:05:19 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Please help me choose what to work on next.
One would be a good pass of std.container, in particular (a) a design
review with the DbI glasses on; (b) better documentation - sadly it
seems to me so inadequate as to make containers themselves unusable;
(c) investigate use of UFCS - std.container's design predates UFCS yet
is a perfect fit for it, and most likely other cool language
improvements we've added since.
No plans to use std.allocator? I think containers are the next logical
step after allocators, and will also serve as a proving ground for the
allocator API.
I agree. In fact RedBlackTree from dcollections used an allocator, and
the apparatus is still pretty much in std.container.rbtree.
Interesting, I didn't know about that.
Part of me hoped to make another stab at getting dcollections suitable
for inclusion in Phobos (much of my design philosophy has changed over
the last few years), but I don't think I have the cycles :(
Regarding projects that we discussed you are considering, I suggest we
focus on putting std.container in good shape and opt for a redesign only
if there are great benefits. Also, I think we should stay with
libc-based I/O.
Andrei
