Jump to page: 1 2
Thread overview
Thoughts about std.experimental.all?
Feb 28
Dukc
Mar 01
Seb
Mar 04
Seb
Mar 05
Dukc
Mar 21
Seb
Mar 21
jmh530
Mar 22
Seb
February 28
For those who don't know, std.experintal.all is a module that, when imported, effectively imports almost all std modules. I have been using it for some time now, and personally I love it and wish it remains. Compile times have not been a major issue for me -it still compiles faster than the C# part of my main project, and faster than dub can import stuff anyway. I think the only reason to choose importing more than one or two std modules is when you're in an embedded enviroment that can't compile everthing std.experimental.all includes.

But I'm interested, what are your opinions? Is std.experimental.all a success, or is it just my feeling?
February 28
On Thursday, 28 February 2019 at 10:58:39 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> For those who don't know, std.experintal.all is a module that, when imported, effectively imports almost all std modules. I have been using it for some time now, and personally I love it and wish it remains. Compile times have not been a major issue for me -it still compiles faster than the C# part of my main project, and faster than dub can import stuff anyway. I think the only reason to choose importing more than one or two std modules is when you're in an embedded enviroment that can't compile everthing std.experimental.all includes.
>
> But I'm interested, what are your opinions? Is std.experimental.all a success, or is it just my feeling?

I use it wherever I can, cus that's what it was designed for.
February 28
On 2/28/19 5:58 AM, Dukc wrote:
> 
> But I'm interested, what are your opinions? Is std.experimental.all a success, or is it just my feeling?

Big fan of it. It's not something I'd use everywhere (there's something to be said for not cluttering the namespace), but it's absolutely fantastic for scripts and other short programs. Heck, that's why even before std.experimental.all existed, I included a module that does pretty much the same thing into Scriptlike. (I think I got the idea from rdmd's eval feature.)
March 01
On Thursday, 28 February 2019 at 10:58:39 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> For those who don't know, std.experintal.all is a module that, when imported, effectively imports almost all std modules.

Without your description (or the docs) I would have assumed std.experimental.all only to import everything under std.experimental.

Of all the things that have gone into std.experimental, I am unaware of anything ever coming out of it again. IMO, the concept of std.experimental is flawed without some sort of policy for how long a module can stay experimental.

So if this is a poll for promotion of std.experimental.all to std.all, you have my +1.
March 01
On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:15:01 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 February 2019 at 10:58:39 UTC, Dukc wrote:
>> For those who don't know, std.experintal.all is a module that, when imported, effectively imports almost all std modules.
>
> Without your description (or the docs) I would have assumed std.experimental.all only to import everything under std.experimental.
>
> Of all the things that have gone into std.experimental, I am unaware of anything ever coming out of it again. IMO, the concept of std.experimental is flawed without some sort of policy for how long a module can stay experimental.
>
> So if this is a poll for promotion of std.experimental.all to std.all, you have my +1.

It would just be `import std` ;-)
That was my goal all along when I pushed for and created std.experimental.all.
March 01
On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:18:29 UTC, Seb wrote:
> On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:15:01 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>> So if this is a poll for promotion of std.experimental.all to std.all, you have my +1.
>
> It would just be `import std` ;-)
> That was my goal all along when I pushed for and created std.experimental.all.

+2 ten ;-)
March 04
On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:35:26 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:18:29 UTC, Seb wrote:
>> On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:15:01 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>>> So if this is a poll for promotion of std.experimental.all to std.all, you have my +1.
>>
>> It would just be `import std` ;-)
>> That was my goal all along when I pushed for and created std.experimental.all.
>
> +2 ten ;-)

FYI: Now you can show your support in this PR -> https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/6889
March 05
On Monday, 4 March 2019 at 05:43:21 UTC, Seb wrote:
>
> https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/6889

Before we even asked :)
March 21
On Monday, 4 March 2019 at 05:43:21 UTC, Seb wrote:
> On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:35:26 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>> On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:18:29 UTC, Seb wrote:
>>> On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 18:15:01 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>>>> So if this is a poll for promotion of std.experimental.all to std.all, you have my +1.
>>>
>>> It would just be `import std` ;-)
>>> That was my goal all along when I pushed for and created std.experimental.all.
>>
>> +2 ten ;-)
>
> FYI: Now you can show your support in this PR -> https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/6889

OK. Thanks a lot for your support!
This is now in master and coming to your nearest DMD nightly and DMD 2.086:


https://dlang.org/changelog/pending.html#std-all
March 21
On Thursday, 21 March 2019 at 12:12:00 UTC, Seb wrote:
> [snip]
>
> OK. Thanks a lot for your support!
> This is now in master and coming to your nearest DMD nightly and DMD 2.086:
>
>
> https://dlang.org/changelog/pending.html#std-all

Nice.

Where it says
"The baseline cost for import std; is less than half a second (varying from system to system) and work is in progress to reduce this overhead even further."
It would be interesting if there was a way to speed it up specifically for something like run.dlang.org as well.
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2