Should this work?

[Regan Heath]

On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:25:13 -0000, Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10 January 2014 03:17, Regan Heath <regan at netmail.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:15:41 -0000, Regan Heath <regan at netmail.co.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  In other words, why can't we alias or wrap the generic routines in
>>> std.string
>>>
>>
>> What I meant here is why can't we alias or wrap the generic routines  
>> (from
>> std.range, std.algo.. into aliases/functions) in std.string.
>
>
> We can and should. Very liberally.
> I'm still very concerned about the magnitude of bloat that gets pulled in
> by any of these modules though. They're all intimately connected, none of
> them seem to be able to exist without all of the others.
> And there are some really huge template functions out there. Massive
> functions, which take multiple template arguments (N^2 permutations),  
> where
> the template types might only affects one or 2 lines... they need to be
> broken down into very small template functions, and a non-templated inner
> function.

We need, if one does not exist already, a dependency mapper tool.  One  
which would give some sort of graphical/hierarchical output of modules and  
their dependencies, ideally drilling right down to the functions, methods,  
variables etc being used.

Sounds fun, and there is a DMD frontend to build on right?  Anyone got the  
spare time?

Regan

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/