On 2/10/11 9:50 AM, Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From:Andrei Alexandrescu<[email protected]>
std.datetime has 34219 lines, which accounts for over 26% of the entire Phobos
size. If Jonathan will (as he promised, I didn't forget :o)) fix line sizes
to conform to 80 columns, then std.datetime will become 40961 lines, or straight
30% of Phobos.
(This might have to do with the increase of "hello, world" that was
noted by some people on the compiler list.)
I don't think so, but I cannot be sure. I'd say a full 75-90% of
std.datetime is unit tests or documentation. That shouldn't increase
the size of the lib, and certainly not by as much as it does.
It increases the size of the source that someone looking at the library
must navigate and absorb.
In case I wasn't clear: my concern is source size. I am now sorry I
mentioned library size, and twice so because I didn't verify the hypothesis.
It is difficult to believe that a library needs that much unittests in
terms of sheer size. The more I browse through std.datetime, the more
firmly my hair is standing up on my head. It's most all large
hand-unrolled loops. I am now sorry I voted for the library without
having raised a flag at this very serious problem. I didn't realize its
size back then.
I understand there are factors that contribute to that: date and time
manipulation is a bulky endeavor, there's a ton of unittests, and
there's a lot of documentation. But at a level I find it difficult to digest
the fact that in sheer numbers date and time manipulation accounts for 30% of
Phobos. As a comparison point, std.algorithm does arguably a lot of work, has
adequate documentation, and has unittest coverage at 95%, yet does all that in a
"measly" 8027 lines.
Lines of file does not mean % of a library, especially when a large
portion of it is not compiled. I think we need to stop this
prejudice against uncompiled LOC. I fully support having unit tests
next to the code being tested, it's the whole point of the builtin
unit test system in D.
I am sorry, I disagree with discounting LOC. LOC is LOC. Compiled or
uncompiled it is intellectual overhead. We need to write good code, code
that we provide as living examples on how to write quality programs.
Good code is not unrolled loops. Well, except sometimes :o).
Bottom line, the doc generator should do a better job of generating
documentation, so we don't *have* to open the file, and if
std.datetime is adding too much binary to the exe, we should fix
whatever problems dmd is likely having there.
I agree.
Andrei
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
