Could we reserve void[T] for builtin set of T ?

[matovitch via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 1 April 2016 at 15:39:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, April 01, 2016 12:57:12 matovitch via Digitalmars-d 
> wrote:
>> On Friday, 1 April 2016 at 12:45:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
>> wrote:
>> > As it stands, if someone wants a set with Phobos, we have 
>> > RedBlackTree in std.container. So, we actually have sets 
>> > already. But all of that will presumably be getting an 
>> > overhaul with what Andrei has been up to.
>>
>> I don't know about the implementation of redblack tree in 
>> phobos, but I am willing to bet on a large performance 
>> drawback if you compare it against an optimized hash table 
>> (for example using robin-hood open addressing techniques). And 
>> I guess it is for sorted set (like a heap) with O(log N) 
>> insertion and deletion (although this may be just a 
>> theoretical worry)...Furthermore, the template constraint 
>> indicate the need of a less predicate which you may not need 
>> or want to define.
>
> RedBlackTree is a red-black-tree, so it's a sorted set with 
> whatever pros and cons come with that. Having a hash set would 
> have different pros and cons. Ideally, we would have both, and 
> I expect that we will eventually, but at the moment, we just 
> have RedBlackTree, but that's more than nothing, and it's 
> exactly what would be needed for many use cases even if a hash 
> set were available.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Indeed, just wanted to point that out. (I guess that's why the 
set was introduced before the unordered one in the c++ stl as 
well). I feel like containers are an old topic. Last time I asked 
I was told : wait for the allocators. What is the advancement on 
this side ? Are there any plan at writing more containers for 
phobos ? (I know that I am in the bad position of 
complaining...but if there is no obstacle...I am ready to write a 
draft of hashset in D, although surely not to phobos standards)