I will make the changes to rename it drizzled::algorithm:: It appears we have a mild consensus
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote: > I withdraw my objection to that. > > Jay Pipes wrote: > > drizzled::algorithm:: > > > > is my vote. > > > > Monty Taylor wrote: > >> BIKESHED > >> > >> I'm sorry to be an ass... but this conversation, while completely > >> important in general, has NOTHING to do with the thing Joe needs to > >> know... which is what should we name the namespace into which we place > >> md5 and crc32 functions inside of drizzle. > >> > >> The libhashkit thing is a much more involved longer-term project that > >> there are still several things such as what brian is talking about that > >> need to be figured out. > >> > >> Jay Pipes wrote: > >>> I thought that is precisely what you were already doing with the > >>> proposed libhashkit? > >>> > >>> /me is confused. > >>> > >>> -jay > >>> > >>> Brian Aker wrote: > >>>> Hi! > >>>> > >>>> I believe that the number of libraries that have to be > >>>> installed/compiled to make Drizzle compile needs to be kept small. > >>>> Protobuf is bad enough, but we shouldn't increase them. > >>>> > >>>> CVS had this nice feature where you could chain trees together in > >>>> order to share files. I wish we had a feature like that in BZR. > >>>> > >>>> I am not sure if the answer is we copy in new versions like we do > >>>> today and come up with a snazzy way of doing that, or if we somehow > >>>> find a way to link BZR. Creating more downloads though? That is a pain > >>>> and just creates more issuers for developers. > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> -Brian > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Jan 5, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> 1) Should these files (particularly the headers) be moved to a > >>>>> shared, installable, dependency library project? If so, I would > >>>>> assume it would be called pandora-something and be shared among > >>>>> libmemcached, gearmand, drizzled, etc. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2) Regardless of whether the files are in a separate library or not, > >>>>> should hashing functions be included in an xxx::algorithm:: namespace > >>>>> or should there be a separate namespace just for hashing functions > >>>>> (xxx::util:: for instance)? > >>>>> > >>>>> My personal vote is for: > >>>>> > >>>>> A separate library, named libpandora. > >>>>> > >>>>> A namespace in said library called pandora::algorithm:: which > >>>>> contains all algorithms (hashing, sorting, searching, etc). > >>>>> Personally, I feel hashing functions are in the same category as sort > >>>>> functions and search functions. > >>>>> > >>>>> -jay > >>>>> > >>>>> Monty Taylor wrote: > >>>>>> Ok. That's what Jay is talking about and the reason he advocates > >>>>>> drizzled::algorithm. > >>>>>> I am saying I don't have a problem with drizzled::algorithm for > >>>>>> things > >>>>>> like sorting and searching, since that's the sort of things you'll > >>>>>> find > >>>>>> in <algorithm> in the STL. But something that just computes a hash > >>>>>> doesn't belong lumped in with code that searches a container to me. > >>>>>> Jay Pipes wrote: > >>>>>>> Understood, but we are talking about algorithms that are not > >>>>>>> necessarily > >>>>>>> restricted to just hashing. For instance, sorting and searching > >>>>>>> algorithms. We are asking whether drizzled::algorithm:: is an > >>>>>>> appropriate namespace for this work to go into? Or should it be > >>>>>>> any of > >>>>>>> the following? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> pandora::algorithm:: > >>>>>>> pandora::util:: > >>>>>>> drizzled::util:: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Something else? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -jay > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Brian Aker wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi! > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Jan 5, 2010, at 11:52 AM, Joe Daly wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Currently what resides in this namespace is the crc32 > >>>>>>>>> implementation > >>>>>>>>> used for md5 checksums. > >>>>>>>> The plan is to copy in libhashkit at some point (or use it if it > is > >>>>>>>> locally installed). We are aways off from this though, but that is > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> eventual plan. I want to be able to re-use all of the > >>>>>>>> hash/distribution work in that library. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>> -Brian > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>>>> Mailing list: > >>>>>>>> https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss<https://launchpad.net/%7Edrizzle-discuss> > >>>>>>>> Post to : drizzle-discuss@lists.launchpad.net > >>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : > >>>>>>>> https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss<https://launchpad.net/%7Edrizzle-discuss> > >>>>>>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>>> Mailing list: > >>>>>>> https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss<https://launchpad.net/%7Edrizzle-discuss> > >>>>>>> Post to : drizzle-discuss@lists.launchpad.net > >>>>>>> Unsubscribe : > >>>>>>> https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss<https://launchpad.net/%7Edrizzle-discuss> > >>>>>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >>>>>>> > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: > https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss<https://launchpad.net/%7Edrizzle-discuss> > Post to : drizzle-discuss@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : > https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss<https://launchpad.net/%7Edrizzle-discuss> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : drizzle-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
