• Tom (5/5) May 09 2006 Maybe it sounds as a stupid question but I still wonder why to mimic C i...
• Tom (4/9) May 09 2006 --
• Jarrett Billingsley (7/10) May 09 2006 This has been discussed before ;) Same goes for std.stdarg and std.stdi...
• Stewart Gordon (20/28) May 09 2006 AIUI they couldn't have named it std.int, because int is a keyword. But...
• Jarrett Billingsley (7/14) May 09 2006 Yep, pre-0.75 there was no std package. You'll notice in the changelog ...

Tom <Tom_member pathlink.com> writes:

Maybe it sounds as a stupid question but I still wonder why to mimic C include
name for standard input/output.

Regards,

--
Tom;

Tom <Tom_member pathlink.com> writes:

Sorry for posting this here, it was meant to digitalmars.D

In article <e3q9ir$2i7n$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Tom says...
Maybe it sounds as a stupid question but I still wonder why to mimic C include
name for standard input/output.

Regards,

--
Tom;

-- 
Tom;

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Tom" <Tom_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
news:e3q9ir$2i7n$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Maybe it sounds as a stupid question but I still wonder why to mimic C 
 include
 name for standard input/output.

This has been discussed before ;)  Same goes for std.stdarg and std.stdint. 
It's probably from when the std modules didn't used to be in std, and were 
just "import stdio;", etc.

In any case, the runtime library needs an overhaul before 1.0, there's no 
doubt about that.. 

Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
 "Tom" <Tom_member pathlink.com> wrote in message 
 news:e3q9ir$2i7n$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Maybe it sounds as a stupid question but I still wonder why to mimic C 
 include name for standard input/output.

 
 This has been discussed before ;)  Same goes for std.stdarg and std.stdint. 

AIUI they couldn't have named it std.int, because int is a keyword.  But 
still, that doesn't mean there isn't a better name than stdint.

 It's probably from when the std modules didn't used to be in std, and were 
 just "import stdio;", etc.

<snip>

Was there any such time?  Either way, std.stdio didn't exist back then.

Actually, a possible explanation is that the two "std"s mean different 
things.

The first one refers to the D standard library that is Phobos.

The second refers to the standard input/output streams.

So std.stdio is the D standard library module for accessing the standard 
I/O.

Stewart.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/M d- s:-  C++  a->--- UB  P+ L E  W++  N+++ o K-  w++  O? M V? PS- 
PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++++ h-- r-- !y
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:e3qe2d$2p8r$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 Was there any such time?  Either way, std.stdio didn't exist back then.

Yep, pre-0.75 there was no std package.  You'll notice in the changelog that 
0.75 says "Changed to a new standard library package layout."  My first 
experience with D was with 0.74, and I remember there not being a std 
package.

 Actually, a possible explanation is that the two "std"s mean different 
 things.

 The first one refers to the D standard library that is Phobos.

 The second refers to the standard input/output streams.

 So std.stdio is the D standard library module for accessing the standard 
 I/O.

I suppose that's a sane explanation.  :)