(Was: On 80 columns should (not) be enough for everyone)

[spir]

On 01/31/2011 08:32 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> At minimum, it needs to be smarter about user-defined types. The functions for a
> class or struct should not be grouped with free functions. They should be
> grouped with the type that they're in._That_, at least, should be automatable,

Isn't that's what namespaces are for? A big advantage of OO-like coding (or 
custom namespaces) for std modules.

> but it wouldn't help any with std.algorithm, since it's full of free functions
> (though it would be a big improvement for std.datetime).

See above. Why aren't many algorithms implemented in the modules defining what 
they operate on? Sure, "free" algorithms precisely are meant ot be generic. But 
in most cases there is, or could (should) be, a top-level type. In particular, 
don't many algos work on ranges?

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com