GSoC-2011 project:: Containers

[KennyTM~]

On Mar 30, 11 16:18, Daniel Gibson wrote:
> Am 30.03.2011 01:55, schrieb Jonathan M Davis:
>> On 2011-03-29 14:50, dsimcha wrote:
>>> == Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisProg at gmx.com)'s article
>>>
>>>> The fancier stuff would be nice, but we don't even have a doubly-linked
>>>> list yet. We should get the simpler stuff sorted out before we get
>>>> particularly fancy, not to mention that it's usually the simple stuff
>>>> that gets heavily used.
>>>
>>> For the most part I agree, but a doubly linked list might be **too**
>>> simple. Linked lists are so trivial to implement that I'd tend to
>>> roll my
>>> own that does exactly what I need with regard additional behavior on
>>> insertion, etc. rather than wrapping a library solution to get these
>>> features.
>>
>> A doubly-linked list is on the list of containers that every standard
>> library
>> should have or it's likely to be considered lacking. I can understand
>> rolling
>> your own for specific uses, but _I_ sure don't want to be doing that if I
>> don't have to. If I want a doubly-linked list, I want to be able to just
>> create a standard one and use it. C++, C#, and Java all have
>> doubly-linked
>> lists in their standard libraries.
>>
>> If no one else ever implements a doubly-linked list for Phobos, I'll
>> probably
>> do it eventually simply because it's one of the containers that is on the
>> short list of containers that pretty much every standard library has.
>>
>> - Jonathan M Davis
>
> It may be feasible to enhance the single-linked list to support both
> single- and double linking, via an additional template-parameter "bool
> doubly" or something like that and some static-ifs in the implementation.
> I once created a simple single/double-linked queue for D1 like that.
>
> Cheers,
> - Daniel

It is always possible to combine types together with 'static if', but 
the structure and interface is sufficiently different that doubly-linked 
list should better be a separate type.