On Wednesday, August 08, 2012 18:47:04 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 8/8/12 4:34 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > I say just keep at simple and leave it at std.hash. It's plenty clear > > IMHO. > > Not clear to quite a few of us. IMHO it just makes us seem (to the > larger community) clever about a petty point. There's plenty of other > better names, and std.digest is very adequate.
I prefer std.hash to std.digest, but I don't necessarily care all that much. What I was objecting to in particular was the suggestion to split it into std.hash.digest and std.hash.func. I think that all of the hashing algorithms should just go in the one package. Adding another layer is an unnecessary complication IMHO. - Jonathan M Davis