On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:13:06 -0400, Gor Gyolchanyan
<gor.f.gyolchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
It should have both shared and unshared implementations of methods to
be a full-fledged container.
Maybe, maybe not.
I'm reluctant to add a copy of all functions to the containers just to
support shared. We don't have a const or inout equivalent for shared.
I have a feeling this problem will come to a head eventually and be solved
by someone smarter than me.
Also, this kind of things are too commonly used to be outside Phobos.
I would agree with you. dcollections was proposed as the container
library for Phobos, Andrei and I could not come to a compromise about the
design, and so he created std.container instead. There should be some
history on the newsgroups, look for my post on d.announce when
dcollections 2.0 was first announced.
Feel free to steal anything from dcollections to put into std.container,
std.container.RedBlackTree is already a verbatim copy of dcollections'
version, I put it in there. Both have the same license, so there should
be no issue. I just happen to prefer the design and philosophies of
dcollections instead of std.container, so I have little incentive to add
to std.container.
-Steve
