std.xml should just go

[BLS]

On 06/02/2011 16:41, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 2/5/11 17:54 EST, BLS wrote:
>> On 04/02/2011 04:20, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Cool. Is Michael Rynn willing to make a submission?
>>
>> He announced a while ago in d.announce. std.xml2 candidate.. A few weeks
>> earlier (if am not completely wrong) he offers his implementation for
>> phobos.
>
> We need to improve the formalism of submissions to Phobos. The first
> successful instance of that is std.datetime - a model we should follow.
>
>> Regarding ranges.
>> - Ranges of ranges which are IMHO needed for any kind of non linear
>> data-structures (say:everything which contains a node) seem to be very
>> difficult to handle.
>
> Feel free to discuss. (I'll note that that would only further my
> obsession with ranges...)
>
>> -I could further argue that Steven is still using cursors in
>> dcollections, but well, you already know that :)
>
> Cursors are an addendum to ranges, not a replacement.
>
>
> Andrei
Will send you an email containing a skiplist based rudimentary 
dictionary container. Nothing special so far but interesting 'cause its 
Node-Structure contains node[]. (or node*[] // )

Since skiplists are pretty simple datastructures, at least compared to 
some self balancing tree algorithms, it would be an excellent 
opportunity to show how ranges work on data-structures. In practice.

IMHO, we need again a new a discussion regarding how to implement 
containers.
1- concurrent/ non concurrent containers
2- Isn't it cleaner to have std.adt // abstract datatypes like rbtree, 
avl, whatever nodes, graphs
3- final class vs struct
4- Constraints vs Interfaces
5- What about container events ?
bjoern
ps
Despite that, due to the fact that the QT folks *prefer to implement 
their dictionary container based on skiplists, this structure is 
probably worth to become part of phobos.