std.signal : voting has begun

[Martin Nowak]

On 01/21/2014 02:48 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>
> I completely missed the review/voting, sorry, though mine would have
> been a "no" too, for the in my opinion inappropriate use of string
> mixins in the API. If you find yourself to be needing to stringify a
> passed in type for use in a string mixin, you are doing something wrong,
> as it is near impossible to make this work reliable. There are many
> other pitfalls than the one mentioned in the docs, e.g. with renamed
> imports, protection specifiers, …
>
> I hope that this module will continue to be improved as a DUB package,
> though, because there certainly is interest in a solid implementation,
> even if signals are currently not really part of the "go-to D toolbox"
> for most people right now. Who knows what a later round of review might
> bring once the library has seen some more adoption in the wild.
>
> David

I strongly agree with this opinion.
Please note that it's not the lack of interest but the lack of time 
which prevented me from participating in this review.

-Martin