On 05/15/2011 06:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On 2011-05-15 15:48, Robert Clipsham wrote:
On 15/05/2011 23:39, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 05/15/2011 02:35 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/15/2011 7:43 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
(That's also why we should think of a shorter name instead of
parallel_algorithm... and with this parenthesis I instantly commanded
the
attention of the entire community.)
Leave it as std.parallel_algorithm:
1. people instantly know what it is
2. google will index it as "parallel algorithm", exactly what we want.
URL names carry a lot of weight with google page rank
Calling it "palgorithm" will get us nowhere in terms of visibility.
Sounds like a good argument.
Andrei
Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree. While palgorithm saves on typing
and avoids the hideous underscore, parallel_algorithm is far easier to
find.
Argument #2 I don't find as attractive, but it could be a nice way to
increase D's usage (not that many people are looking for it -
http://www.google.com/trends?q=parallel+algorithm although that's
probably not indicative, considering it contains the majority, who
aren't programmers).
Besides which, it's not like you'll be typing it all the time, if you're
doing things that are likely to need parallel computation then that one
line of import isn't going to make much difference to the amount of
typing you have to do.
If it's a big problem, then that's where alias comes in. However, if
parallel_algorithm's function names are the same as algorithm's, that could
result in a lot of name clashing and force you to either use alias or fully
qualify the package name frequently. If the function signatures are different
enough though, that won't actually end up being a problem.
- Jonathan M Davis
The function signatures would be identical underlying the fact that
their actual semantics are identical.
Andrei
