"Walter Bright" <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:jfjclq$slu$1...@digitalmars.com... > On 1/23/2012 1:14 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> "Walter Bright"<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote in message >> news:jfj0ao$3q9$1...@digitalmars.com... >>> >>> Another way of looking at it is Phobos should provide snap-together >>> building blocks, not trivial combinations of them. >> >> So whenever there's trivia to be done, it should be cluttering up the >> *user's* code instead? > > It's a very successful strategy used in Unix, which does not have a tool > for everything, but one can easily construct a tool for everything by > stringing together components with |
It works in Unix because the building blocks are (mostly) well-designed and cover all needed use-cases. I think you'd have a hard time finding a Unix parallel to "Scatter to!blah(blah) all over your code in every single call to every fucking standard function that involves a string whenever you want your code to deal with wstring or dstring instead, or invent your own PhobosPlus on top of Phobos to paper up all the existing use-case holes." If you did, I'd probably consider it a blemish where a Unix component screwed up with modularity.
