On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 16:18:20 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko
wrote:
Feedback is welcome!
I don't have time right now to play around with it, but I looked
through the documentation. Here are my comments:
1) I would consider
http://docs.algorithm.dlang.io/latest/mir_ndslice.html
to be the first thing that anyone looks at when they think about
mir ndslice. I think it's pretty good, but there's always room
for some improvements, such as
a) The extent of the compatibility between D's standard library
and mir (such as what you wrote in the post above)
b) Some of your high level explanation for the motivation for
recent changes, such as iterators, universal/canonical/contigous.
I.e., something along the lines of ndslice is so powerful it can
do all these different things.
2) The explanation of the difference between universal,
canonical, and contiguous is in
http://docs.algorithm.dlang.io/latest/mir_ndslice_slice.html#.Slice
It should be referenced in functions like
Universal/Canonical/Contigous/universal/canonical.
3) mir.ndslice.topology has universal, canonical,
assumeCanonical, and assumeContiguous. Why no contiguous or
assumeUniversal?
4) It looks like some of the functions from std.algorithm, like
map, are now in mir.ndslice.topology instead of
mir.ndslice.algorithm. You might include more detailed
explanations at the top of the documentation of topology and
algorithm for why the modules are split up this way.
Keep up the good work.
