[phobos] Suggestions for std.process

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

I think ideally we'd separate the notion of opening/closing/buffering 
streams from fetching their data or writing to them. Data communication 
should be done via ranges. So instead of having types File and class 
BufferedFile, we should have File and then ranges that are buffered or 
not etc.

That won't play great with C's stdio which sets buffers at FILE* level, 
but I think we can come up with a good design. I've been very happy with 
using File.byLine and File.byChunk as two efficient methods of reading 
data from files.


Andrei

Lars Tandle Kyllingstad wrote:
> Hehe.. std.stdio.File is actually one of the new parts of Phobos, 
> introduced with DMD 2.029 less than a year ago.  (std.stream, on the 
> other hand, seems to be a relic from D1. It doesn't look like it's seen 
> major updates since 2005...)
> 
> Though the underlying code of std.stdio.File may be suboptimal, I have 
> taken a liking to its interface.  But then again, the notion of any 
> input/output stream being a 'file' may not be natural for many users.
> 
> -Lars
> 
> 
> Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
>> Will there be an unbuffered interface to file handles?  std.stdio.File 
>> wraps a FILE* which I find substandard.  I don't think D should be 
>> relying on C buffering for D-only constructs.
>>
>> I actually find the whole notion of relying on libc a little suspect, 
>> even for the standard handles.
>>
>> Is there a document somewhere which lists which parts of phobos will 
>> be trimmed?  I am not very familiar with the library, and I'd like to 
>> know what parts to avoid when contributing.
>>
>> -Steve
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>>> From: Andrei Alexandrescu <andrei at erdani.com>
>>>
>>> I plan to throw away all of std.stream.
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>
>>
>>
>>       _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> 
>