Justin Johansson wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"dave eveloper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Ezneh Wrote:
So, it is not better to find a compromise between these libraries ?
Why they have to be "two" libraries rather than one which was
designed by larsivi, Walter Bright and Andrei Alexandrescu ?
I haven't seen larsivi around lately. Is it possible that there's a
communication problem? Perhaps a personality mismatch?
Because of silly symbol names like 'retro' I think there's more
reason for someone to not like Phobos. Bearophile also always reminds
us that a proper closure inlining support would make collection
algorithms as fast as the ugly string template hack Phobos. That way
you wouldn't have hard coded parameter symbols like a and b.
Dictionary.com Unabridged, Based on the Random House Dictionary:
retro-
a prefix occurring in loanwords from Latin meaning “backward”
(retrogress); on this model, used in the formation of compound words
(retrorocket).
So can we stop this "retro is a bad name" nonsense now?
Sure, just include a copy of, or link to, an English dictionary
alongside D documentation, together with appropriate annotations.
My understanding is that he included it to clarify that it's an
appropriate word, not to explain a rare word such as "nefandous".
That's tantamount to what you are saying. imho, use of "silly"
words like this in the language are a retrograde step.
This is the third time I'm asking: what is a list of allegedly silly
names in phobos? Far as I can tell the case against "retro" and "iota"
is rather tenuous. So what are others? readText? topN? setDifference?
Talk to me.
Andrei
