• Joey Peters (16/16) Mar 10 2005 I find the lack of a standard template library quite annoying. Being the...
• Matthew (6/22) Mar 10 2005 Indeed!
• Joey Peters (2/4) Mar 10 2005 Do you have some sort of a roadmap or design document for the DTL?
• Matthew (10/12) Mar 10 2005 Did have, but have been sidetracked in a big way for some time.
• Joey Peters (6/19) Mar 11 2005 We should certainly work together, setting a STL for D. I think the C++ ...
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= (7/9) Mar 10 2005 Do you mean that you want to re-define Error and Object ? (I hope not)
• Joey Peters (5/11) Mar 10 2005 Mainly the filename thing. I think names like object.d, error.d, etc are...
• Craig Black (12/14) Mar 10 2005 Perhaps I could help. I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of experienc...
• Georg Wrede (2/18) Mar 10 2005 Have you actually tried the "slow GC"?
• Craig Black (7/8) Mar 10 2005 No I haven't. But I know for a fact that in its current state, it is sl...
• Unknown W. Brackets (12/26) Mar 10 2005 Personally, I agree. I mean, I've argued with people about garbage
• clayasaurus (6/27) Mar 10 2005 maybe you could get a project at dsource.org, post your c++ templates
• Craig Black (3/5) Mar 10 2005 Sure. Just keep in mind that these templates are easy to use but the
• clayasaurus (21/31) Mar 10 2005 There's a forum on dsource named 'potential projects' where you make a
• Matthew (3/21) Mar 10 2005 Where can we find your C++ template library?
• Joey Peters (8/22) Mar 11 2005 If I am going to try to pull something off I need all the help I can get...
• Matthew (4/47) Mar 11 2005 I think you need to show your wares, as it's a little difficult to judge...
• Zz (2/9) Mar 14 2005 Is this C++ library available for download?
• Ben Hinkle (6/30) Mar 10 2005 Note in-depth design discussions about STL-like libraries for D should
• Charlie Patterson (7/14) Mar 10 2005 I'm just a D lurker so far, but it has been pointed out that half of the...

Joey Peters <Joey_member pathlink.com> writes:

I find the lack of a standard template library quite annoying. Being the weirdo
I am I tried to write one myself multiple times, but failed, making it too
clunky and slow. Is there an estimated time of release or group effort to make a
central STL, as part of the standard package? The biggest problem I had, by the
way, was that D is simply too perfect, and -I- am not. It's hard to code it in
such a way that it's elegant and makes semantic sense at the same time. Coding
an STL is a very fun practise though.

I'm thinking of objects like stacks, vectors, strings, just containers. I tried
to expand it with more functionality like spawn objects (keeps track of object
instances) and extra string functionality (expanded with regexp), it would be
nice if the D STL would be an improvement over the C++ STL.

Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.

PS: I don't like it that Phobos' namespace eats the names you may use for
filenames like error.d, object.d, etc.

PSS: Any good IDE there yet?

"Matthew" <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:

I find the lack of a standard template library quite annoying.

I don't doubt it.

 Being the weirdo
 I am I tried to write one myself multiple times, but failed, making it too
 clunky and slow. Is there an estimated time of release or group effort to make
a
 central STL, as part of the standard package?

This year.

 The biggest problem I had, by the
 way, was that D is simply too perfect, and -I- am not. It's hard to code it in
 such a way that it's elegant and makes semantic sense at the same time. Coding
 an STL is a very fun practise though.

Indeed!

 I'm thinking of objects like stacks, vectors, strings, just containers.

They're in the prototypical DTL, and also in minTL.

 I tried
 to expand it with more functionality like spawn objects (keeps track of object
 instances) and extra string functionality (expanded with regexp), it would be
 nice if the D STL would be an improvement over the C++ STL.

It most certainly will be

 Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
 effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.

Go for it. Good bits can be folded in when we get serious on DTL.

Joey Peters <Joey_member pathlink.com> writes:

This year.

Good.

Go for it. Good bits can be folded in when we get serious on DTL.

Do you have some sort of a roadmap or design document for the DTL?

"Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> writes:

Go for it. Good bits can be folded in when we get serious on DTL.

 Do you have some sort of a roadmap or design document for the DTL?

Did have, but have been sidetracked in a big way for some time. 
Thankfully the process of doing DPD will cause it to receive focus.

Essentially, I'd like for it to be similar to STL in purpose: providing 
useful, consistent and efficient containers & algorithms, and also a 
framework/paradigm for extension.

I expect to get back to it before the month is out, and that minTL, DTL 
and anyone else's inputs in this area will coallesce before the end of 
the year. I know Walter's skeptical that it'll be ready for 1.0, but I 
think it will. (But then Walter and I have somewhat differing views on 
how far D has to go before it's 1.0-able. <g>)

Joey Peters <Joey_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <d0qisj$7hl$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthew says...
Go for it. Good bits can be folded in when we get serious on DTL.

 Do you have some sort of a roadmap or design document for the DTL?

Did have, but have been sidetracked in a big way for some time. 
Thankfully the process of doing DPD will cause it to receive focus.

Essentially, I'd like for it to be similar to STL in purpose: providing 
useful, consistent and efficient containers & algorithms, and also a 
framework/paradigm for extension.

I expect to get back to it before the month is out, and that minTL, DTL 
and anyone else's inputs in this area will coallesce before the end of 
the year. I know Walter's skeptical that it'll be ready for 1.0, but I 
think it will. (But then Walter and I have somewhat differing views on 
how far D has to go before it's 1.0-able. <g>)

We should certainly work together, setting a STL for D. I think the C++ STL is a
pretty good example of what it should look like, however, I also think that in D
some things could look so much better. Iterator types for example, or anything
you can think of.

By the end of the year... This year will still take pretty long. :P

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

Joey Peters wrote:

 PS: I don't like it that Phobos' namespace eats the names you may use for
 filenames like error.d, object.d, etc.

Do you mean that you want to re-define Error and Object ? (I hope not)


Or just that you can't use those filenames without them being included ?
(which is somewhat annoying, especially with stray dogs like unittest.d)

Ignoring some out-of-place Phobos files like crc32.d & etc/c/zlib/zlib.d
which I hope will get cleaned up before the library is released? (D 1.0)

--anders

Joey Peters <Joey_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <d0pa16$1t4k$1 digitaldaemon.com>,
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= says...
Joey Peters wrote:

 PS: I don't like it that Phobos' namespace eats the names you may use for
 filenames like error.d, object.d, etc.

Do you mean that you want to re-define Error and Object ? (I hope not)


Or just that you can't use those filenames without them being included ?
(which is somewhat annoying, especially with stray dogs like unittest.d)

Mainly the filename thing. I think names like object.d, error.d, etc are pretty
common choises. I also don't really understand why it doesn't work, according to
the modules section it should just be poured in it's own namespace?

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:

 Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
 effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.


Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of experience 
writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so I wrote my own 
template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL and more powerful 
IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, but I understand that 
capability is provided by D natively.  I've never programmed in D, but I've 
kept my eye on the language since it was introduced on the internet.  To get 
a library started, I could port my templates to D.

However, I do not like the idea of having to rely on a slow GC.  I 
understand that D supports the old new and delete approach.  This would be 
better for container templates IMO.

Anyone interested?

-Craig 

Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:

Craig Black wrote:
Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.

 
 
 
 Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of experience 
 writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so I wrote my own 
 template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL and more powerful 
 IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, but I understand that 
 capability is provided by D natively.  I've never programmed in D, but I've 
 kept my eye on the language since it was introduced on the internet.  To get 
 a library started, I could port my templates to D.
 
 However, I do not like the idea of having to rely on a slow GC.  I 
 understand that D supports the old new and delete approach.  This would be 
 better for container templates IMO.

Have you actually tried the "slow GC"?

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:

 Have you actually tried the "slow GC"?

No I haven't.  But I know for a fact that in its current state, it is slow. 
Walter says so himself.  It hasn't been optimized yet.  And I don't see 
Walter optimizing GC in the near future.

Let me clarify myself.  I do not mean to prevent programmers from using GC. 
I just don't want to use it internally for templates when there are more 
efficient ways of doing things.

-Craig 

"Unknown W. Brackets" <unknown simplemachines.org> writes:

Personally, I agree.  I mean, I've argued with people about garbage 
collection before, to convince them that in many ways it is a necessary 
evil; this is exactly as I believe.

However, some people take it too far, imho.  Instead of letting the 
garbage collector just help for the areas where it is needed, they let 
it take over everything.  This is good in many ways, and prevents 
mistakes... but I've always felt explicit deallocation is good too.

Explicitly deallocating memory you know you don't need to pass around, 
so long as you don't expect the garbage collector to really optimize the 
freeing of larger groups of data so easily, seems like only a good 
thing.  If phobos does this by default, all the better, no?

-[Unknown]


Have you actually tried the "slow GC"?

 
 
 No I haven't.  But I know for a fact that in its current state, it is slow. 
 Walter says so himself.  It hasn't been optimized yet.  And I don't see 
 Walter optimizing GC in the near future.
 
 Let me clarify myself.  I do not mean to prevent programmers from using GC. 
 I just don't want to use it internally for templates when there are more 
 efficient ways of doing things.
 
 -Craig 
 
 

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

Craig Black wrote:
Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.

 
 
 
 Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of experience 
 writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so I wrote my own 
 template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL and more powerful 
 IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, but I understand that 
 capability is provided by D natively.  I've never programmed in D, but I've 
 kept my eye on the language since it was introduced on the internet.  To get 
 a library started, I could port my templates to D.

maybe you could get a project at dsource.org, post your c++ templates 
online, then the community can help speed up the c++ --> d process.


 However, I do not like the idea of having to rely on a slow GC.  I 
 understand that D supports the old new and delete approach.  This would be 
 better for container templates IMO.

D doesn't force anyone to use the GC. Adding your own new/delete doesn't 
hurt either. Just give the users of your library the option of using the 
GC or not.

 
 Anyone interested?
 
 -Craig 
 
 

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:

 maybe you could get a project at dsource.org, post your c++ templates 
 online, then the community can help speed up the c++ --> d process.

Sure.  Just keep in mind that these templates are easy to use but the 
implementation is involved.  How would I go about doing that?

-Craig

clayasaurus <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

Craig Black wrote:
maybe you could get a project at dsource.org, post your c++ templates 
online, then the community can help speed up the c++ --> d process.

 
 
 Sure.  Just keep in mind that these templates are easy to use but the 
 implementation is involved.  How would I go about doing that?
 
 -Craig
 
 

There's a forum on dsource named 'potential projects' where you make a 
post about your project and what its goals are etc. Note you need to 
register before you can post. 
(http://www.dsource.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=13)

Then the admin (brad) will set up a svn directory for you to post the 
project. SVN is very straightfoward IMO, and on windows you can use a 
good graphical frontend called tourtise svn.

So you can check out the default stuff in your directory with a command 
similar to , 'right click -->checkout' or ...

svn co http://svn.dsource.org/svn/projects/myproject

which will create 'myproject' folder on your desktop/wherever.
you can then add / remove files and folders as you wish, and it will be 
accessable to anyone with an internet connection. you can make changes 
and update the folder as need be.

with tortoise on windows it shouldn't be harder than 'right click' and 
'add folder'

on linux, just a command line 'svn add folder/' after you get it 
installed (apt-get install subversion on debian)

http://subversion.tigris.org/ for more about subversion
www.dsource.org/ 'getting started' reiterates most of what i'm saying

"Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> writes:

Where can we find your C++ template library?

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> wrote in message 
news:d0q4u9$2p9j$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no 
 group
 effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful 
 STL.


 Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of 
 experience writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so 
 I wrote my own template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL 
 and more powerful IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, 
 but I understand that capability is provided by D natively.  I've 
 never programmed in D, but I've kept my eye on the language since it 
 was introduced on the internet.  To get a library started, I could 
 port my templates to D.

 However, I do not like the idea of having to rely on a slow GC.  I 
 understand that D supports the old new and delete approach.  This 
 would be better for container templates IMO.

 Anyone interested?

 -Craig
 

Joey Peters <Joey_member pathlink.com> writes:

In article <d0q4u9$2p9j$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Craig Black says...
 Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
 effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.


Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of experience 
writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so I wrote my own 
template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL and more powerful 
IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, but I understand that 
capability is provided by D natively.  I've never programmed in D, but I've 
kept my eye on the language since it was introduced on the internet.  To get 
a library started, I could port my templates to D.

However, I do not like the idea of having to rely on a slow GC.  I 
understand that D supports the old new and delete approach.  This would be 
better for container templates IMO.

Anyone interested?

-Craig 

If I am going to try to pull something off I need all the help I can get.
However, it's always better to work on something in existance, I don't know how
open DTL is. I have to say for myself that I'm not that much of an advanced
programmer, but I know my things. The thing with the STL is that I always try to
make it too perfect. Perhaps we could just port a STL. I tried to port the C++
STL earlier but that was such a load of work predicting all those preprocessors
and figuring out in what order things were, I quit the very same day.

"Matthew" <admin stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> writes:

"Joey Peters" <Joey_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:d0rp00$1haf$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <d0q4u9$2p9j$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Craig Black says...
 Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no 
 group
 effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but 
 powerful STL.


Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of 
experience
writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so I wrote my 
own
template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL and more 
powerful
IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, but I understand 
that
capability is provided by D natively.  I've never programmed in D, but 
I've
kept my eye on the language since it was introduced on the internet. 
To get
a library started, I could port my templates to D.

However, I do not like the idea of having to rely on a slow GC.  I
understand that D supports the old new and delete approach.  This 
would be
better for container templates IMO.

Anyone interested?

-Craig

 If I am going to try to pull something off I need all the help I can 
 get.
 However, it's always better to work on something in existance, I don't 
 know how
 open DTL is. I have to say for myself that I'm not that much of an 
 advanced
 programmer, but I know my things. The thing with the STL is that I 
 always try to
 make it too perfect. Perhaps we could just port a STL. I tried to port 
 the C++
 STL earlier but that was such a load of work predicting all those 
 preprocessors
 and figuring out in what order things were, I quit the very same day.

I think you need to show your wares, as it's a little difficult to judge 
where you're at / going to from these posts.

"Zz" <Zz Zz.com> writes:

 Perhaps I could help.  I am a C++ programmer that has a lot of experience 
 writing C++ templates.  I personally don't like C++ STL, so I wrote my own 
 template library.  It's WAY easier to use than C++ STL and more powerful 
 IMO.  It currently only lacks a hash table template, but I understand that 
 capability is provided by D natively.  I've never programmed in D, but 
 I've kept my eye on the language since it was introduced on the internet. 
 To get a library started, I could port my templates to D.

Is this C++ library available for download?

Zz 

"Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> writes:

"Joey Peters" <Joey_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:d0p88j$1ru8$1 digitaldaemon.com...
I find the lack of a standard template library quite annoying. Being the 
weirdo
 I am I tried to write one myself multiple times, but failed, making it too
 clunky and slow. Is there an estimated time of release or group effort to 
 make a
 central STL, as part of the standard package? The biggest problem I had, 
 by the
 way, was that D is simply too perfect, and -I- am not. It's hard to code 
 it in
 such a way that it's elegant and makes semantic sense at the same time. 
 Coding
 an STL is a very fun practise though.

 I'm thinking of objects like stacks, vectors, strings, just containers. I 
 tried
 to expand it with more functionality like spawn objects (keeps track of 
 object
 instances) and extra string functionality (expanded with regexp), it would 
 be
 nice if the D STL would be an improvement over the C++ STL.

 Maybe somebody already has a nice, simplistic STL? Or, if there's no group
 effort yet, maybe somebody wants to help me code a tiny, but powerful STL.

 PS: I don't like it that Phobos' namespace eats the names you may use for
 filenames like error.d, object.d, etc.

 PSS: Any good IDE there yet?

Note in-depth design discussions about STL-like libraries for D should 
probably be on the newsgroup digitalmars.D.dtl
It's generally very quiet so getting that puppy as busy as this main 
newsgroup would be a good thing. 

"Charlie Patterson" <charliep1 excite.com> writes:

"Joey Peters" <Joey_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:d0p88j$1ru8$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I'm thinking of objects like stacks, vectors, strings, just containers. I 
 tried
 to expand it with more functionality like spawn objects (keeps track of 
 object
 instances) and extra string functionality (expanded with regexp), it would 
 be
 nice if the D STL would be an improvement over the C++ STL.

I'm just a D lurker so far, but it has been pointed out that half of the STL 
goes away since D has built in associative arrays (maps), and arrays act 
similar to vectors (and therefore stacks).  Array slices also solve the 
problem of many algorithms.  But yeah it would need filling out with 
libaries (deques and some algorithms).