• davidl (15/15) Dec 16 2007 I really don't get why there was an argument about it.
• Jarrett Billingsley (2/15) Dec 16 2007 What?
• Gregor Richards (3/23) Dec 16 2007 Second.
• Alexander Panek (5/26) Dec 16 2007 no u!
• Paul Findlay (2/3) Dec 16 2007 Haha, obviously?
• Sean Kelly (6/10) Dec 17 2007 How so? If someone wants to return a string using a different encoding,...

davidl <davidl 126.com> writes:

I really don't get why there was an argument about it.
Obviously tango team chose a bad name. toUtf8 has nothing to do with  
enforcing a
string to utf8 encoded. Thus, toUtf8 is misleading. And as a library API ,  
the
design goal is to make each API simple. And design is a process of solving  
problems.
While solving problems needs to decompose. It's a common sense to  
decompose problems.
But why when we come to this toString and toUtf8, we forget to decompose??

Decompose toUtf8 -> we get toString -> Encode_String_Utf8

Someone might argue toString is too long to type. But toStr is even  
shorter than toUtf8

-- 
使用 Opera 革命性的电子邮件客户程序: http://www.opera.com/mail/

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

"davidl" <davidl 126.com> wrote in message news:op.t3gmbbugeb62bo lzg...
 I really don't get why there was an argument about it.
 Obviously tango team chose a bad name. toUtf8 has nothing to do with 
 enforcing a
 string to utf8 encoded. Thus, toUtf8 is misleading. And as a library API , 
 the
 design goal is to make each API simple. And design is a process of solving 
 problems.
 While solving problems needs to decompose. It's a common sense to 
 decompose problems.
 But why when we come to this toString and toUtf8, we forget to decompose??

 Decompose toUtf8 -> we get toString -> Encode_String_Utf8

 Someone might argue toString is too long to type. But toStr is even 
 shorter than toUtf8

What? 

Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
 "davidl" <davidl 126.com> wrote in message news:op.t3gmbbugeb62bo lzg...
 I really don't get why there was an argument about it.
 Obviously tango team chose a bad name. toUtf8 has nothing to do with 
 enforcing a
 string to utf8 encoded. Thus, toUtf8 is misleading. And as a library API , 
 the
 design goal is to make each API simple. And design is a process of solving 
 problems.
 While solving problems needs to decompose. It's a common sense to 
 decompose problems.
 But why when we come to this toString and toUtf8, we forget to decompose??

 Decompose toUtf8 -> we get toString -> Encode_String_Utf8

 Someone might argue toString is too long to type. But toStr is even 
 shorter than toUtf8

 
 What? 
 
 

Second.

  - Gregor Richards

Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> writes:

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 23:09:19 -0500
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote:

 "davidl" <davidl 126.com> wrote in message
 news:op.t3gmbbugeb62bo lzg...
 I really don't get why there was an argument about it.
 Obviously tango team chose a bad name. toUtf8 has nothing to do
 with enforcing a
 string to utf8 encoded. Thus, toUtf8 is misleading. And as a
 library API , the
 design goal is to make each API simple. And design is a process of
 solving problems.
 While solving problems needs to decompose. It's a common sense to 
 decompose problems.
 But why when we come to this toString and toUtf8, we forget to
 decompose??

 Decompose toUtf8 -> we get toString -> Encode_String_Utf8

 Someone might argue toString is too long to type. But toStr is even 
 shorter than toUtf8

 
 What? 

no u!

-- 
Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org>

Paul Findlay <r.lph50+d gmail.com> writes:

davidl wrote:
 Obviously tango team chose a bad name.

Haha, obviously?

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

davidl wrote:
 
 I really don't get why there was an argument about it.
 Obviously tango team chose a bad name. toUtf8 has nothing to do with 
 enforcing a string to utf8 encoded. Thus, toUtf8 is misleading.

How so?  If someone wants to return a string using a different encoding, 
they can use a different function name.  Given that D has "standardized" 
on Unicode, I think it's a fair assertion that the default encoding 
should be Unicode.


Sean