GSoC-2011 project:: Containers

[Emil Madsen]

On 30 March 2011 10:38, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com> wrote:

> On 2011-03-30 01:18, 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.
>
> To what end though? I don't think that that would save you much. While some
> of
> the implementation would be the same, so much of it would be different,
> that
> you'd practically have two complete types defined in one template. At that
> point, you might as well create a separate class/struct. It's just simpler
> to
> have them separate, and I don't see any real gain in combining them. Having
> both is great, since there are times that you want one and times when you
> want
> the other, but having both SList and DList (or whatever it would be called)
> as
> separate types makes sense.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
>


Just a question that popped into my mind, how does D's std.container handle
cyclic lists? using static if?

-- 
// Yours sincerely
// Emil 'Skeen' Madsen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20110330/2d828625/attachment-0001.html>