I have a suggestion to rename the D library file
std.md5 to std.checksum or std.mdg or std.mdigest.
The alternative is to have multiple std.xyz for different
digests.

Should std.md5 be renamed as std.mdigest or std.checksum or std.mdg?  std.md5 is ok but what if you want to use different digests?

My rational is that it would be better if the D library
included a more generic name.  This way you could have a class of digests
in one library class.

This way you could be more generic to reflect a general class of digests such as SHA or MD5 or MD4 or CRC.

"Sajuuk Khar" <Sajuuk_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bufovt$2rfi$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> I have a suggestion to rename the D library file
> std.md5 to std.checksum or std.mdg or std.mdigest.
> The alternative is to have multiple std.xyz for different
> digests.
>
> Should std.md5 be renamed as std.mdigest or std.checksum or
> std.mdg?  std.md5 is ok but what if you want to use different digests?
>
> My rational is that it would be better if the D library
> included a more generic name.  This way you could have a class of digests
> in one library class.
>
> This way you could be more generic to reflect a general class of digests such as SHA or MD5 or MD4 or CRC.

I see your point, but I don't see much of a problem with having mutlipe std.xyz's for different digests. (SHA is implemented, but an export license is apparently needed to distribute it, which I'm too lazy to figure out how to get <g>.)

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:57:56 -0800, Walter <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> I see your point, but I don't see much of a problem with having mutlipe
> std.xyz's for different digests. (SHA is implemented, but an export license is apparently needed to distribute it, which I'm too lazy to figure out how to get <g>.)

Hi, do it the PGP way. Print it out, send it to someone by paper, he scans it and than we have it internationally available. Dumb rules can always be worked around... Robert

Walter wrote:

> "Sajuuk Khar" <Sajuuk_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message
> news:bufovt$2rfi$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>I have a suggestion to rename the D library file
>>std.md5 to std.checksum or std.mdg or std.mdigest.
>>The alternative is to have multiple std.xyz for different
>>digests.
>>
>>Should std.md5 be renamed as std.mdigest or std.checksum or
>>std.mdg?  std.md5 is ok but what if you want to use different digests?
>>
>>My rational is that it would be better if the D library
>>included a more generic name.  This way you could have a class of digests
>>in one library class.
>>
>>This way you could be more generic to reflect a general class of
>>digests such as SHA or MD5 or MD4 or CRC.
> 
> 
> I see your point, but I don't see much of a problem with having mutlipe
> std.xyz's for different digests. (SHA is implemented, but an export license
> is apparently needed to distribute it, which I'm too lazy to figure out how
> to get <g>.)
> 
> 

How about using a package for similar modules, like std.hash.XYZ? As more modules are added, not putting it into a separate package/directory is likely going to be a headache. Off the top of my head: crc(8, 16, 24, 32, 64), adler32, md2, md4, md5, sha, sha-1, sha-256, sha-512, Tiger, Whirlpool, RIPE-MD160, Haval and more in the future. The way Phobos is organized (oxymoron?) now is similar to the way my dad organizes his documents on a computer - all in one directory, and usually with the title
"Placename                                date/year.doc".

Cheers,
Sigbjørn Lund Olsen