std.parallelism: VOTE IN THIS THREAD

[Lars T. Kyllingstad]

As announced a week ago, the formal review process for David Simcha's 
std.parallelism module is now over, and it is time to vote over whether 
the module should be included in Phobos.  See below for more information 
on the module and on previous reviews.

Please vote in this thread, by replying with

  - "YES" if you think std.parallelism should be included in Phobos
    in its present form,

  - "NO" if you think it shouldn't.

Voting closes in one week, on 26 April, at 12:00 (noon) UTC.

Note that this thread is for voting only; please refrain from further 
discussion and reviews here.


THE MODULE AND THE REVIEW PROCESS

Code and documentation can be found here:

    https://github.com/dsimcha/std.parallelism/blob/master/parallelism.d
    http://cis.jhu.edu/~dsimcha/d/phobos/std_parallelism.html

The module has been through several review cycles.  We started a formal 
review some time ago, but a fair amount of criticism (constructive, that 
is) and suggestions for major changes came in during the last few days 
before the planned vote.  As a consequence, the review and the voting was 
postponed.  David has since gone about fixing the issues that were 
raised, and in his own words, "[the] suggestions have led to major 
improvements, especially in the documentation".

A week ago we restarted the formal review process, and in this last one 
no new suggestions, nor any further criticism, has been put on the 
table.  David has suggested some alternative names for the module, but I 
think we can treat that separately from this vote, or possibly leave it 
up to the Phobos team to decide, as it is more a question of the 
organisation of the library as a whole than of the quality and 
suitability of this specific module.

std.parallelism is already a quite mature piece of code (first announced 
in October 2009 as "parallelFuture"), and it has been used actively for 
some time by both David and yours truly.

For those who haven't followed the previous reviews, here are a few links 
to the most relevant discussions:

    http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/
std.parallelism_Final_review_131248.html

    http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/
review_of_std.parallelism_132291.html

    http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/
std.parallelism_changes_done_132607.html


-Lars