Vote started for std.uni

[Dmitry Olshansky]

20-May-2013 12:15, deadalnix пишет:
> On Monday, 20 May 2013 at 06:19:29 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
>> Please cast your vote for std.uni at:
>> http://forum.dlang.org/post/zczqphzzqnxvjfllehzg@forum.dlang.org
>
> Overall it looks great. I have one question l is it possible to build
> tries at runtime using CTFE ?

At compile-time? The short answer is it should be possible but not quite 
yet.
The long answer is:

enum myA = unicode.alphabetic.toTrie!4;

---
Error: CTFE internal error: unsupported assignment this = p
uni.d(1841):        called from here: 
this.data.opAssign((Uint24Array!(GcPolicy) __ctmp6762 = 0;

  , __ctmp6762).this(flattened))
uni.d(6742):        called from here: (InversionList!(GcPolicy) 
__ctmp6477 = 0;

  , __ctmp6477).this(decompressIntervals(compressed))
---
So I forgot to reduce a bug it seems (or maybe I filed it).

Another reason is that will be quite slow to compile (in the current 
setting). That's why all of tables in new std.uni were precomputed by 
constructing at run-time and serializing to source.

This is actualy one of things I'd love to push as a separate feature 
Phobos-wide: serialization of objects to CTFE-able/mixin-able source 
code. Some of these done in std.uni weren't clean enough to fit into a 
public interface.

> Anyway, as long as this is implementable,
> this have my vote.
>
> Second thing, it is probably too late, but let's ask anyway. Is that
> possible to rename the thing as std.unicode ?

I dunno. Technically I see no problem with std.unicode except that we
have to patch old code and some ~1.5 year of painfully slow deprecation 
and for what? If the chief benefit of renaming is aesthetics then I'd 
rather pass. If we make it as part of restructuring of std.* that is 
long overdue then I'm fine but it's a discussion in its own.

We should probably split the discussion-while-voting in a separate 
thread in D.d.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky