std.serialization: pre-voting review / discussion

[Tobias Pankrath]

On Sunday, 18 August 2013 at 08:38:53 UTC, ilya-stromberg wrote:
> As I can see, we have a few options:
> - accept std.serialization as is. If users can't use 
> std.serialization due memory limitation, they should find 
> another way.
> - hold std.serialization until we will have new std.xml module 
> with support of range/file input/output. Users should use 
> Orange if they need std.serialization right now.
> - hold std.serialization until we will have binary archive for 
> serialization with support of range/file input/output. Users 
> should use Orange if they need std.serialization right now.
> - use another xml library, for example from Tango.
>
> Ideas?

We should add a suitable range interface, even if it makes no 
sense with current std.xml and include std.serialization now. For 
many use cases it will be sufficient and the improvements can 
come when std.xml2 comes. Holding back std.serialization will 
only mean that we won't see any new backend from users and would 
be quite unfair to Jacob and may keep off other contributors.