Review of Andrei's std.benchmark

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 09:13:40 Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> * Is this module so important to keep it as a top level module? I'm
> thinking something like a utility package or a time/date package. How
> about std.util.benchmark?

util is one of the worst package names ever, because it means basically 
nothing. Any function could go in there.

As for a time/date package, we already have std.datetime (which will hopefully 
be split into the package std.datetime at some point, but we need something 
like DIP 15 or 16 before we can do that), and we're moving the benchmarking 
_out_ of there. If std.datetime were already a package, then maybe putting it 
in there would make some sense, but benchmarking is arguably fundamentally 
different from what the rest of std.datetime does. I really so no problem with 
benchmarking being its own thing, and std.benchmark works just fine for that.

- Jonathan M Davis