Yah, the problem with "commonly used" is that everybody's commonly used subset is different.

std.all for the win!


Andrei

On 06/08/2010 03:50 PM, David Simcha wrote:
I'm afraid having std.common would turn into Bikeshed War III unless it
included so many things that it was practically a std.all module
anyhow.  For example, do regexes belong?  I personally tend to prefer
plain old string processing for most things and use regexes only when
there's a real need.  Others tend to prefer regexes as their "default
hammer".  Does std.math belong?  I write lots of math-heavy code, so I'd
say yes.  People who don't write math-heavy code would probably say no.
Does std.date go in?  I never use it, but people writing more
business-y, less math-y code probably use it all the time.

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Robert Clipsham
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    On 08/06/10 21:18, Walter Bright wrote:



        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.


    Given that it's meant as an easy way to include the commonly used
    functions etc, rather than all, how about a std.common along side
    it? Where std.common imports commonly used code by scripts etc, and
    std.all imports anything that isn't std.common? This way it's the
    best of both worlds.


    _______________________________________________
    phobos mailing list
    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos




_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

Reply via email to