Den 16-11-2011 00:08, Bernard Helyer skrev:
I'll just post my thoughts here while they're fresh. It looks good. The
documentation is what I'd expect from a Phobos module, as is the naming
convention.
auto _basicFtp(T)(const(char)[] url, const(void)[] sendData, Ftp client)
You're right. Should be private
If you don't want people using it, shouldn't it be marked private instead
of using the underscore for obscurity?
private struct Pool(DATA)
{
private:
You've marked private things as 'private foo;' everywhere else in the
module, what's with the switch in styles for this struct? Also, as the
whole struct is module private I'm not sure of the utility of marking
members private. I guess it's a form of documentation.
Regarding the switch in I just think that I'd been doing lots of c++
coding that day. Anyway I think it is ok to use that style for small
classes/structs that can fit on a single screen even though I haven't
done that consistently either in this module. I'll change it to match
the rest of the module.
Regarding the second question: I just think it is good style to mark up
the private parts. And if someone copy/pastes it as a public struct
it'll work as intended.
But really, I'm grasping at straws. Even if the above were to remain, I
would love to see this in Phobos yesterday. :)
-Bernard.
Thanks for the comments.
/Jonas
