Phobos 'collections' question
Marco.Leise at gmx.de
Mon Oct 24 19:50:33 PDT 2011
Am 14.09.2011, 18:57 Uhr, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer
<schveiguy at yahoo.com>:
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:50:25 -0400, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr at gmx.ch> wrote:
>> On 09/14/2011 04:08 PM, Robert McGinley wrote:
>>> Hey all,
>>> Mostly as an exercise I'm considering writing an ArrayList, AVL tree,
>>> and possible other standard data structures in D. I have two
>>> 1.) If completed should I send these around for review and inclusion
>>> or do they not belong in phobos?
>>> 2.) If I'm working on including these in phobos should I put them in
>>> container.d (that has RedBlack Trees and a Singlelinked List) or is
>>> there a better location?
>> As far as I know, the reason why std.container is not under active
>> development, is that phobos does not have an allocator abstraction yet.
>> As soon as there is one, the module will probably undergo some breaking
>> changes. But I think the more well implemented standard data structures
>> there are in Phobos, the better. I think as soon as the standard
>> allocator interface is settled on, your efforts will be welcome. Steve
>> can probably answer your question better though.
> Certainly more containers are welcome.
> The review for getting things into phobos is done via github. You do
> not need write permission to generate a pull request. Yes, they should
> all be put into std.container for now.
> I'd recommend doing one pull request per container, that way one
> container type does not detract from the inclusion of another.
> I don't think that lack of allocators should prevent implementing
> containers. My collection package
> (www.dsource.org/projects/dcollections) uses allocators, and they're
> pretty orthogonal to the operation of the container.
> BTW, feel free to use any ideas/code from dcollections, it's also boost
> licensed. Note that the red black tree implementation in phobos is
> copied verbatim from dcollections. If you implement a good AVL tree, I
> might even steal it for dcollections ;) (with attribution, of course!)
I recently had the need for a priority queue and your library was the
obvious choice. But it did the same that my code did when I ported it from
32-bit to 64-bit: array.length is no longer a uint, but a ulong, so the
code breaks. So my advice is to use size_t when you deal with a natural
number that can be up to the amount of addressable memory.
More information about the Digitalmars-d