dxml 0.2.0 released

[rikki cattermole]

On 12/02/2018 3:50 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> In any case, I'm going to finish implementing dxml without any kind of DTD
> support and then see how things go as far as the Phobos review process goes.
> If dxml gets rejected, because the majority of folks think that we're better
> off with std.xml (or no xml parser at all in Phobos) than one that doesn't
> have DTD support, then oh well. That sucks, but anyone who wants dxml can
> then use it as a 3rd party library. I think that the D community would be
> worse off because of that, but it's not ultimately my decision to make, and
> either way, I have the parser that I need.

We are definitely not better off with just std.xml currently.

The problem comes from the word currently. By going into Phobos even if 
experimental, its going to be around for a while in some form or 
another. So we need to invest a decent amount of time into not creating 
more problems for new users expecting the world and not getting it.

If somebody (say a student?) were to write up a proper API and use dxml 
as a basis for a simpler parser, now that could be a worth while project 
and definitely could go into Phobos.

I may even consider doing it at some point in the future.