Re: Vote for std.uni
I'm voting yes.
Re: Vote for std.uni
Yes Thanks, Oleg.
Re: Vote for std.uni
Yes. Titlecasing support is missing. I assume that can be added in? Thanks, Jerry
Re: Vote for std.uni
25-May-2013 02:17, Jerry пишет: Yes. Titlecasing support is missing. I assume that can be added in? Yup, was working on it just yesterday ;) Even if it doesn't get in with initial merge I plan to add few missing things in due course with pulls (notably collation). Thanks, Jerry -- Dmitry Olshansky
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Monday, May 20, 2013 08:18:12 Jesse Phillips wrote: If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what condition, otherwise vote no. Yes. I wish that I'd managed to review the module more thoroughly before this, but I didn't manage to, and from what I've seen, I suspect that I'd need to study up on Unicode a lot more to give a particularly in depth review of it anyway. On some level, we just have to trust that Dmitry knows what he's doing with this incredibly complicated subject (particularly those of us who don't know it well enough ourselves). - Jonathan M Davis
Re: Vote for std.uni
Yes.
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Sun, 19 May 2013 23:18:12 -0700, Jesse Phillips jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com wrote: This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures. If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what condition, otherwise vote no. In summary, most discussion revolved around the string based functions for toLower/toUpper and where they should live. Please place any further comments in the official review thread leaving only your vote and a short comment (there should be no need to reply to anyone). Docs: http://blackwhale.github.io/phobos/uni.html Source: https://github.com/blackwhale/phobos/tree/new-std-uni Stand Alone: https://github.com/blackwhale/gsoc-bench-2012 Review Thread: http://forum.dlang.org/post/xbuphdghoyymjajpf...@forum.dlang.org Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting. Yes. With a +1 for std.unicode or std.encoding.unicode -- Adam Wilson IRC: LightBender Project Coordinator The Horizon Project http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
Re: Vote for std.uni
Yes
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 08:18:12AM +0200, Jesse Phillips wrote: This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures. If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what condition, otherwise vote no. [...] Yes! T -- The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. -- Bertrand Russell. How come he didn't put 'I think' at the end of it? -- Anonymous
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 01:37:59 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote: I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode. I second that. I understand that is unpleasant, but better to make the effort now than later. Transition should be, also, smoother: old code will continue to work with current std.uni module, that will be marked as deprecated, while new code will use the proposed module, named std.unicode.
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Tuesday, May 21, 2013 10:31:56 eles wrote: On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 01:37:59 UTC, deadalnix wrote: On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote: I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode. I second that. I understand that is unpleasant, but better to make the effort now than later. I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii. Transition should be, also, smoother: old code will continue to work with current std.uni module, that will be marked as deprecated, while new code will use the proposed module, named std.unicode. Were there even any functions in std.uni which get deprecated as part of this change. I don't remember any, but I'd have to check. But either way, changing the module name would introduce 100% breakage in the module's usage and for little to no gain IMHO. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote: If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what condition, otherwise vote no. Yes, please. Thank you Dmitry for your excellent work.
Re: Vote for std.uni
Yes. And I also vote for renaming to std.unicode; now would be the best time to rename. This could be done with compiler's or a tool that uses the compiler, at the very least a friendly error message.
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 08:40:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii. That is true, but an alias can be easily created. Were there even any functions in std.uni which get deprecated as part of this change. I don't remember any, but I'd have to check. But either way, changing the module name would introduce 100% breakage in the module's usage and for little to no gain IMHO. We can still have std.uni for any period of time still available. Right now is the best moment for a change. We don't even need to break something.
Re: Vote for std.uni
On 2013-05-21 10:40, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii. I would make the opposite argument. Shortening unicode to uni gains nothing at all. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Tue, 21 May 2013 13:23:07 +0100, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote: On 2013-05-21 10:40, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii. I would make the opposite argument. Shortening unicode to uni gains nothing at all. Agreed. I was briefly and initially confused as to what std.uni was, had it been called std.unicode it would have been immediately obvious instead. R -- Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Re: Vote for std.uni
21-May-2013 16:33, Regan Heath пишет: On Tue, 21 May 2013 13:23:07 +0100, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com wrote: On 2013-05-21 10:40, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I'm strongly against this. It makes the module name longer for little gain and breaks code. And std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're likely to have to spell out completely due to how it overlaps with std.ascii. I would make the opposite argument. Shortening unicode to uni gains nothing at all. Agreed. I was briefly and initially confused as to what std.uni was, had it been called std.unicode it would have been immediately obvious instead. R Created new thread. Let's stop diverging this one. -- Dmitry Olshansky
Vote for std.uni
This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures. If you would like to see the proposed std.uni include into Phobos please vote yes. If one condition must be met specify under what condition, otherwise vote no. In summary, most discussion revolved around the string based functions for toLower/toUpper and where they should live. Please place any further comments in the official review thread leaving only your vote and a short comment (there should be no need to reply to anyone). Docs: http://blackwhale.github.io/phobos/uni.html Source: https://github.com/blackwhale/phobos/tree/new-std-uni Stand Alone: https://github.com/blackwhale/gsoc-bench-2012 Review Thread: http://forum.dlang.org/post/xbuphdghoyymjajpf...@forum.dlang.org Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting.
Re: Vote for std.uni
On 20/05/2013 07:18, Jesse Phillips wrote: This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures. I vote YES! A...
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote: Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting. 2014? vote: yes
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote: Sunday April 26 PST will be the last day of voting. Err, May 26.
Re: Vote for std.uni
Yes.
Re: Vote for std.uni
On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:18:15 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote: This is a replacement module for the current std.uni by Dmitry Olshansky. The std.uni module provides an implementation of fundamental Unicode algorithms and data structures. I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode . As said in the other thread : uni can be unicode, but also unique, union, unit, uniform, unix, unijambist, whatever. When theses pile up in a large library, this is more and more difficult to rely on intuition/autocompletion and much more on programmer's memory. It mean that it takes longer to learn the whole library. Overall, the module is good I think and my vote is yes.
