std.path review: update

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Monday 18 July 2011 09:35:17 Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:43:42 -0400, bearophile wrote:
> > Lars T. Kyllingstad:
> >> I believe I have covered most of your requests, with a few exceptions:
> > compatibleStrings is a template still.
> 
> I know.  Sorry, forgot to mention that.  For now, I'd like to keep it the
> way it is.  I can't find any precedence in Phobos for turning these kinds
> of tests into CTFEable functions, and if compatibleStrings were to end up
> in std.traits, for instance, it would stand out as being different from
> everything else in there.  If it is decided that it is better to write
> these tests as ordinary functions, that should probably be done
> throughout Phobos.

And it _should_ be a template. All of the stuff like that are templates. And 
I'm not even sure that it _can_ be a function. And even if it can, what would 
we gain by making it a function anyway? It's operating on types. It's of no 
use at runtime. It's a perfect candidate for an eponymous template. 
std.traits, std.range, etc. do this sort of thing in pretty much exactly the 
same way. There may be a cleaner way to write it then it currently is, but 
using an eponymous template like that is the correct thing to do.

- Jonathan M Davis