I second this. std modules are already well organized for specific categories of code. If we look at a language that uses wildcards for package inclusion such as Java, you do something like java.io.*, not java.*.
This would be more appropriate for something like Tango where modules are created for even small functions. It was tried there, and nobody really used it, so it was removed. -Steve ----- Original Message ---- > From: Walter Bright <[email protected]> > To: Discuss the phobos library for D <[email protected]> > Sent: Tue, June 8, 2010 4:18:00 PM > Subject: Re: [phobos] std.all > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Actually I've generated std.all > myself and experimented with it (attached). The parse time with rdmd is > larger > than with individual modules, but not annoying. > > The > parse time will invariably grow as phobos grows. I expect std.all will become > the preferred method of using D. The problems are: 1. People will come to > expect std.all to have everything and the kitchen sink in it, so we're > stuck. 2. People will inevitably do compile speed benchmarks with > std.all. And then we'll suck. So I say "no" to > std.all. _______________________________________________ phobos mailing > list > href="mailto:[email protected]";>[email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
