== Quote from dsimcha ([email protected])'s article > == Quote from Masahiro Nakagawa ([email protected])'s article > > On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 01:51:02 +0900, dsimcha <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 8. The high-level, templated allocator functions now have a default > > > implementation in terms of lower-level allocator functionality, provided > > > by the TypedAllocatorMixin mixin in std.allocators.allocator. The idea > > > is that an allocator may have better ways of accomplishing this stuff, > > > but this mixin is usually a reasonable default and will avoid code > > > duplication across allocators. I'm leery of including it in the > > > DynamicAllocator interface, though, because for some allocators it's > > > just plain wrong. For example, the default array() implementation just > > > plain wouldn't work with RegionAllocator for huge ranges. > > I think Default(Templated)AllocatorFunctions are better > > than TypedAllocatorMixin. TypedAllocator is not clear for me. > > I will read documents and codes later. > If you mean just making functions like T newArray(Allocator)(Allocator > allocator, > size_t size), etc., I've mentioned before that having the type available to > the > allocator is often useful and therefore these defaults need to be > overrideable. > Otherwise, please clarify.
Oh wait a minute, do you just mean the name of the mixin template? If so, I completely agree that your suggested name is better.
