"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1382.1297122691.4748.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On Monday, February 07, 2011 15:34:26 bearophile wrote: >> Adam Ruppe: >> > My gut tells me you'd get much better results if you tried to >> > write D in D instead of Python in D. >> >> That's really beside the point. The point of the post is that there are >> some spots where I'd like to see Phobos improved. (And I am willing to >> write part of the Phobos code I am asking for). > > Actually, it's not beside the point at all. Regardless of what language > you're > programming in, it's generally best to program in the typical paradigms of > that > language. Trying to contort it to act like another language is _not_ going > to > result in optimal code. > > Now, that's not to say that Phobos can't be improved upon (it certainly > can be), > but if you focus too much on how it doesn't do something like some other > language does, you'll miss what it _can_ do. And it's quite possible that > it > actually does what you're trying to do quite well if you'd just stop > trying to > contort it to act like another language (be it Python or Haskell or Rust > or Go > or Java or C++ or C or Ruby or...). >
Using std.algorithm qualifies as contorting D?