Thanks @JinShil! https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827

The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.

On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in clear in the heading.


Thoughts?

Andrei

On 2015-01-24 17:32:15 +0000, Andrei Alexandrescu said:

> Thanks @JinShil! https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827
> 
> The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.
> 
> On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in clear in the heading.
> 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Andrei

Can we add an io package to std while we're at it and have  std.stdio public import it? :)

-- 
-Shammah

On 24-Jan-2015 20:43, Shammah Chancellor wrote:
> On 2015-01-24 17:32:15 +0000, Andrei Alexandrescu said:
>
>> Thanks @JinShil!
>> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827
>>
>> The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they
>> should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.
>>
>> On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in clear
>> in the heading.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Can we add an io package to std while we're at it and have  std.stdio
> public import it? :)
>

Please, new I/O package is in the works. Meanwhile there is no point wasting a good name for the existing ad-hoc wrapper on top of libc.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 17:32:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Thanks @JinShil! https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827
>
> The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.
>
> On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in clear in the heading.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Andrei

+1
Since the fix for names leaking outside the frames, it looks bad with long std.* names wrapped.
https://i.imgur.com/yhyq5pp.png

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:41:51PM +0000, weaselcat via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 17:32:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >Thanks @JinShil! https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827
> >
> >The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.
> >
> >On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in clear in the heading.
> >
> >
> >Thoughts?
> >
> >Andrei
> 
> +1
> Since the fix for names leaking outside the frames, it looks bad with
> long std.* names wrapped.
> https://i.imgur.com/yhyq5pp.png

Yeah, I think we should make std.container.* and std.range.* collapsed / expandable as well. It should look something like this:

	std
	 » algorithm
	 ...
	 » (+) container
	 » conv
	 » csv
	 ...

When expanded it should look something like this:

	std
	 » algorithm
	 ...
	 » (-) container
	    » binaryheap
	    » dlist
	    » rbtree
	    » slist
	    » util
	 » conv
	 » csv
	 ...

Not sure about the exact location of the expand button, but you get the idea.


T

-- 
It is of the new things that men tire --- of fashions and proposals and improvements and change. It is the old things that startle and intoxicate. It is the old things that are young. -- G.K. Chesterton

On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 18:41:52 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 17:32:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Thanks @JinShil! https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827
>>
>> The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.
>>
>> On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in clear in the heading.
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Andrei
>
> +1
> Since the fix for names leaking outside the frames, it looks bad with long std.* names wrapped.
> https://i.imgur.com/yhyq5pp.png

There was a proposed change to wrap the names on the period, what happened to that?

I'm worried that this is an interim solution that only buys a little time until we put more things into packages.

On 1/24/15 10:50 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> There was a proposed change to wrap the names on the period, what
> happened to that?

That's in. -- Andrei

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:50:17PM +0000, Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
> There was a proposed change to wrap the names on the period, what happened to that?
> 
> I'm worried that this is an interim solution that only buys a little time until we put more things into packages.

That's why *all* packages need to be expandable, not just the top-level std.


T

-- 
Let's not fight disease by killing the patient. -- Sean 'Shaleh' Perry

On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 18:50:12 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:41:51PM +0000, weaselcat via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 17:32:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> >Thanks @JinShil!
>> >https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/827
>> >
>> >The con is that some people may find it confusing, thinking they
>> >should import algorithm instead of std.algorithm etc.
>> >
>> >On the other hand the documentation of each module has "std." in
>> >clear in the heading.
>> >
>> >
>> >Thoughts?
>> >
>> >Andrei
>> 
>> +1
>> Since the fix for names leaking outside the frames, it looks bad with
>> long std.* names wrapped.
>> https://i.imgur.com/yhyq5pp.png
>
> Yeah, I think we should make std.container.* and std.range.* collapsed /
> expandable as well. It should look something like this:
>
> 	std
> 	 » algorithm
> 	 ...
> 	 » (+) container
> 	 » conv
> 	 » csv
> 	 ...
>
> When expanded it should look something like this:
>
> 	std
> 	 » algorithm
> 	 ...
> 	 » (-) container
> 	    » binaryheap
> 	    » dlist
> 	    » rbtree
> 	    » slist
> 	    » util
> 	 » conv
> 	 » csv
> 	 ...
>
> Not sure about the exact location of the expand button, but you get the
> idea.
>
>
> T


That would probably be the best solution here.

On Saturday, 24 January 2015 at 18:55:28 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 1/24/15 10:50 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>> There was a proposed change to wrap the names on the period, what
>> happened to that?
>
> That's in. -- Andrei

It doesn't seem to be working for me. (Firefox 35)