Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 4/3/11 4:38 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-04-03 13:13, Jacob Carlborg wrote: Why is this better? This is just like the pointless aliases you want to avoid. Why do we even have a bool type in the language if we're going to replace it with enums all the time? Andrei has been pushing for

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-04-03 13:13, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2011-04-03 20:09, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > On 3/29/11 4:06 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> I've made a few minor changes: > >> > >> * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any > >> * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusC

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-04-03 20:09, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/29/11 4:06 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None * Updated the documentation Github: https://gith

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-04-03 20:22, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/29/11 4:06 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any I suggest we follow the nascent convention that enum values start with a lowercase letter. Andrei Already fixed. --

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-04-03 15:49, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 4/3/11 6:38 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-02 23:33, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-04-02 09:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-01 11:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor chang

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 3/29/11 4:06 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any I suggest we follow the nascent convention that enum values start with a lowercase letter. Andrei

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 3/29/11 4:06 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None * Updated the documentation Github: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/phobos/tree/isemail Docs: h

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Robert Jacques
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 09:49:44 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 4/3/11 6:38 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-02 23:33, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-04-02 09:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-01 11:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've mad

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 4/3/11 6:38 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-02 23:33, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-04-02 09:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-01 11:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-03 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-04-02 23:33, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-04-02 09:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 2011-04-01 11:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the docu

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-02 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-04-02 09:26, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2011-04-01 11:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> I've made a few minor changes: > >> > >> * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any > >> * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusC

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-02 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-04-01 11:01, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None * Updated the documentation Github: https://gith

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-04-01 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-29 14:06, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > I've made a few minor changes: > > * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any > * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None > * Updated the documentation > > Github: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/phobos/tree/is

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-31 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-03-31 01:12, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 15:27, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/30/11 5:24 PM, bearophile wrote: Andrei: Beyond naming: Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't like this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is useful for Pho

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-31 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-31 00:09, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 3/30/11 10:07 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > On 3/30/11 2:47 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >> I've tried to get Andrei to agree to a style guide a few times, but he's > >> generally pushed back on it. I definitely think that we should have > >> on

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-31 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 3/30/11 10:07 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/30/11 2:47 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I've tried to get Andrei to agree to a style guide a few times, but he's generally pushed back on it. I definitely think that we should have one if we want to actually have a consistent style, but thus fa

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-31 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 3/30/11 9:42 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/30/11 1:47 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: So, should I change the enum members to start with lowercase or leave it like it is? Change please. Thanks, Andrei Ok, will do. -- /Jacob Carlborg

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 17:17, Daniel Gibson wrote: > Am 31.03.2011 01:57, schrieb dsimcha: > > On 3/30/2011 6:24 PM, bearophile wrote: > >> Andrei: > >>> Beyond naming: > >> Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't > >> like this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is usef

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Daniel Gibson
Am 31.03.2011 01:57, schrieb dsimcha: On 3/30/2011 6:24 PM, bearophile wrote: Andrei: Beyond naming: Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't like this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is useful for Phobos (and user code). Bye, bearophile I think the

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread dsimcha
On 3/30/2011 6:24 PM, bearophile wrote: Andrei: Beyond naming: Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't like this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is useful for Phobos (and user code). Bye, bearophile I think the style guide should be focused mostly (

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 15:27, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 3/30/11 5:24 PM, bearophile wrote: > > Andrei: > >> Beyond naming: > > Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't like > > this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is useful for Phobos > > (and user code). > > >

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 3/30/11 5:24 PM, bearophile wrote: Andrei: Beyond naming: Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't like this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is useful for Phobos (and user code). Bye, bearophile I usually prepend private data members with an under

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread bearophile
Andrei: > Beyond naming: Some standard for member attributes? Like m_something, etc? I don't like this a lot, but having a style guide on this too is useful for Phobos (and user code). Bye, bearophile

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 11:19, Daniel Gibson wrote: > Am 30.03.2011 20:15, schrieb Don: > > Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > >> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: > >>> Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: > > Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >> On 2011-03

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread KennyTM~
On Mar 31, 11 04:35, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > For my money, just take the first that applies: > > - Is it a function name? Use thisStyle. > > - Is it a value (be it constant or variable)? Use thisStyle. > > - Is it a type? Use ThisStyle. > > - Is it a module name? Use this_style. This woul

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 13:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > On 3/30/11 2:47 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > I've tried to get Andrei to agree to a style guide a few times, but he's > > generally pushed back on it. I definitely think that we should have one > > if we want to actually have a consistent style,

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 3/30/11 2:47 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I've tried to get Andrei to agree to a style guide a few times, but he's generally pushed back on it. I definitely think that we should have one if we want to actually have a consistent style, but thus far, he hasn't agreed to have one. I think that's

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread KennyTM~
On Mar 31, 11 02:22, Simen kjaeraas wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:19:36 +0200, Daniel Gibson wrote: We desperately need a style guide containing all the things which have actually been agreed to (and equally importantly, nothing which hasn't). The simplest thing to do would be to fix up the ex

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 11:15, Don wrote: > Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: > >> Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > >>> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: > Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> On 3/30/11

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
On 3/30/11 1:47 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: So, should I change the enum members to start with lowercase or leave it like it is? Change please. Thanks, Andrei

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 11:47, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2011-03-30 20:15, Don wrote: > > Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > >> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: > >>> Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: > > Jonathan M Davis wrote: > >> On 2011-03-

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 2011-03-30 20:15, Don wrote: Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote:

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Simen kjaeraas
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:19:36 +0200, Daniel Gibson wrote: We desperately need a style guide containing all the things which have actually been agreed to (and equally importantly, nothing which hasn't). The simplest thing to do would be to fix up the existing one on the website which nobody fol

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Daniel Gibson
Am 30.03.2011 20:15, schrieb Don: Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Don
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: Jacob Carlborg Wrote: I've made

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 04:23, Don wrote: > Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: > >>> Jacob Carlborg Wrote: > I've made a few minor changes: > > * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any > * Add

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 3/30/11 10:49 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: Jacob Carlborg Wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatu

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Lars T. Kyllingstad
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:04:49 +0200, Don wrote: > Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: >> >>> Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: >> Jacob Carlborg Wrote: >>> I've ma

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Don
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: Jacob Carlborg Wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Lars T. Kyllingstad
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:23:02 +0200, Don wrote: > Jonathan M Davis wrote: >> On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: >>> On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: Jacob Carlborg Wrote: > I've made a few minor changes: > > * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * A

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Don
Jonathan M Davis wrote: On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: Jacob Carlborg Wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None * Up

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-03-30 01:27, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: > > Jacob Carlborg Wrote: > >> I've made a few minor changes: > >> > >> * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any > >> * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None > >> *

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-30 Thread Jacob Carlborg
On 3/30/11 1:30 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote: Jacob Carlborg Wrote: I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None * Updated the documentation Github: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/p

Re: Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-29 Thread Jesse Phillips
Jacob Carlborg Wrote: > I've made a few minor changes: > > * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any > * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None > * Updated the documentation > > Github: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/phobos/tree/isemail > Docs: http:/

Review of std.net.isemail part 2

2011-03-29 Thread Jacob Carlborg
I've made a few minor changes: * Renamed EmailStatusCode.Off -> None and On -> Any * Added and clarified the documentation for EmailStatusCode.Any and None * Updated the documentation Github: https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/phobos/tree/isemail Docs: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18386187/isemail.htm