State of std.json?

[Jonathan M Davis]

On 2011-06-25 21:56, Robert Jacques wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 00:25:44 -0400, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com>
> 
> wrote:
> > As I understand it, std.json is due for an overhaul. Also, as I recall,
> > Robert
> > Jacques was working on doing that. What's the current state of that
> > effort?
> > Are we looking at being able to review it anytime soon? Or does more
> > have to
> > be done before that can happen?
> > 
> > I really think that the remaining major module overhauls in Phobos need
> > to
> > have a high priority so that those portions of Phobos can be
> > appropriately
> > stabilized. The longer that we have code sitting around that we're
> > planning to
> > replace, the more code is going to have to be changed when we do replace
> > them.
> > std.json is on the list of modules that supposedly needs an overhaul
> > (I've
> > never used it, so I really don't know anything about its current state),
> > so
> > I'm asking about it.
> > 
> > - Jonathan M Davis
> 
> In and of itself, I feel my std.json patch is ready for review and I've
> posted the docs/code to the phobos list for preliminary review. The major
> issue holding a formal review up is that it is now dependent on a patch to
> std.variant which has suffered scope creep and tertiary bugs. As the
> review queue has had higher priority items in it and there has been little
> community interest in either module, I've put the final polishing of
> std.variant on the back burner. But as the queue is temporarily empty,
> I'll look over my code tomorrow and see if I can't get variant ready for
> review.

Well, AFAIK the only other thing which could be up for review at the moment is 
std.benchmark, which arguably doesn't even need a review, which is quite small 
(something like half of it coming from std.datetime) and is definitely less 
important than getting a pre-existing module revamped such as std.json. So, if 
you're nearly ready to have the variant stuff reviewed, then I think that we 
should go for it. If not, then we can look at std.benchmark first.

- Jonathan M Davis