streaming redux

[SHOO]

(2010/12/28 16:02), Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I've put together over the past days an embryonic streaming interface.
> It separates transport from formatting, input from output, and buffered
> from unbuffered operation.
>
> http://erdani.com/d/phobos/std_stream2.html
>
> There are a number of questions interspersed. It would be great to start
> a discussion using that design as a baseline. Please voice any related
> thoughts - thanks!
>
>
> Andrei

I hope that this argument grows warm. For Phobos, the I/O is a very 
important component.


I have some doubt about this interface.

1.
There seems to be it on the basis of the deriving.
In comparison with current std.stream, what will the advantage be?

2.
I think that there are two advantages in I/O being introduced into 
Phobos _standard_ library. They are an advantage for a person defining a 
device and advantages for the user of the device.

It gives a person defining I/O device an indicator to determine 
interface in a standard library. The person defining a device can apply 
to various helpers of Phobos by following this indicator. It just 
resembles relations of Range and Algorithms.
In this case, it is important that a definition is simple.
Range is very simple. It makes ends meet with only at least three 
definitions(front, popFront, empty). Like this, it is desirable for the 
base of the I/O interface to make ends meet with a minimum definition.
However, TransportBase needs more definitions.
Cannot you offer the interface that is simpler than in duck-typing?

On the other hand, an advantage of the users of the devices is to use 
unified interface and helpers, and it is the point that it can handle in 
the same way even if a device is anything.
I think that at this point Input/OutputRange is good (like 
Unformatter/Formatter). Users can use various Algorithms by making it Range.

3.
Formatter has writef, but thinks that this is unnecessary.
Because the destination is binary data, writef to write in text data at 
should become the function of TextFormatter. And I can say a similar 
thing about readf of Unformatter.

Thanks.

--
SHOO