On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 17:19:34 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
20-May-2013 12:15, deadalnix пишет:
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:19:29 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Please cast your vote for std.uni at:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/zczqphzzqnxvjflle...@forum.dlang.org
Overall it looks great. I have one question l is it possible
to build
tries at runtime using CTFE ?
At compile-time? The short answer is it should be possible but
not quite yet.
The long answer is:
enum myA = unicode.alphabetic.toTrie!4;
As long as it is doable, that sound good to me.
Another reason is that will be quite slow to compile (in the
current setting). That's why all of tables in new std.uni were
precomputed by constructing at run-time and serializing to
source.
I understand. To me a caching compiler is the solution here, but
that is kind of off topic.
I dunno. Technically I see no problem with std.unicode except
that we
have to patch old code and some ~1.5 year of painfully slow
deprecation and for what? If the chief benefit of renaming is
aesthetics then I'd rather pass. If we make it as part of
restructuring of std.* that is long overdue then I'm fine but
it's a discussion in its own.
We should probably split the discussion-while-voting in a
separate thread in D.d.
The problem wth that kind of naming convention is that names do
not convey as much meaning. This can be an issue as the library
get larger and larger, because you got to remember every single
name and can't rely too much on autocompletion.
uni can be unicode, but also unique, union, unit, uniform, unix,
unijambist, whatever.
