tiny std.datetime question

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Thursday, January 17, 2013 07:57:51 Rob T wrote:
> Yeah, I was amazed at how much simpler things became after better
> formatting and organization was applied. Beforehand people were
> asking for std.datetime to be broken up, but no need anymore,
> although maybe the part on benchmarking and related (eg
> stopwatch) should be moved to its own module because those parts
> don't seem to really belong in there.

I'd still like to break it up a bit, but I'm not going to do it unless some 
variant of DIP15 or DIP16 is implemented so that it can be done without 
breaking any code. So, it probably won't be broken up any time soon. It's not 
a big an issue though when the documentation is broken up.

> I hope the effort to move to the new format has not been stalled,
> as I have not seen much about it in a while. Do you know what the
> status is?

No idea. Andrei was pushing for various changes to the vibe stuff before 
actually changing the official docs, and some work was done on that, but I don't 
know where it stands now. Everything I know about it is from the thread where 
it was being discussed a few weeks ago.

- Jonathan M Davis