On Friday, 14 November 2014 at 22:47:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> As far as I understand idea is exactly to separate it (while release has not happened and it is not too late)

(that was my original proposal when reviewing PR too)

On 14/11/2014 21:52, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Friday, 14 November 2014 at 06:10:43 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
>> std.range.checks
>
> For this, std.range.constraints would also be perfectly fine.

If it's not too late, can we change the name to std.range.traits? It seems better as they can be used in 'static if', not just for template constraints. Plus it's shorter and consistent with std.traits naming.

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 06:06:26PM +0000, Nick Treleaven via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 14/11/2014 21:52, David Nadlinger wrote:
> >On Friday, 14 November 2014 at 06:10:43 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
> >>std.range.checks
> >
> >For this, std.range.constraints would also be perfectly fine.
> 
> If it's not too late, can we change the name to std.range.traits? It seems better as they can be used in 'static if', not just for template constraints. Plus it's shorter and consistent with std.traits naming.

It's not too late until the next release.

I prefer std.range.primitives, since it's not just traits, but also includes things like range API for built-in arrays (.front, .empty, .popFront).


T

-- 
What do you mean the Internet isn't filled with subliminal messages? What about all those buttons marked "submit"??

On Wednesday, 19 November 2014 at 18:22:27 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 06:06:26PM +0000, Nick Treleaven via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On 14/11/2014 21:52, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> >On Friday, 14 November 2014 at 06:10:43 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
>> >>std.range.checks
>> >
>> >For this, std.range.constraints would also be perfectly fine.
>> 
>> If it's not too late, can we change the name to std.range.traits? It
>> seems better as they can be used in 'static if', not just for template
>> constraints. Plus it's shorter and consistent with std.traits naming.
>
> It's not too late until the next release.
>
> I prefer std.range.primitives, since it's not just traits, but also
> includes things like range API for built-in arrays (.front, .empty,
> .popFront).
>
>
> T

I think "constraints" should be called "traits", because that's
what it actually is, and the top level module is called "traits"
(eg: isSomeString <==> isForwardRange). It makes little sense to me for both to have different names.

The "popFront"/"moveFront" and friends I think belong in
"primitives". It sounds nice.

Also, every package std.range.* should publicly include
std.range.constraints too. That's what container does, in that
every sub package also includes the the "make" in
std.container.utility.

I disagree that `traits` and `constraints` are the same. Constraint is a specific case of a trait which returns boolean value and has semantical from of `isSomething`. Trait is pretty much any static reflection utility, whatever it does.