D based BEEP library?

[Joakim]

On Saturday, 5 January 2013 at 19:54:11 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
> In other words, bad marketing. Unfortunate, since it sounds 
> like a good
> idea upon my first glance of it (aside from its choice to use 
> XML for
> certain things, which IMO is too much of an _unnecessary_ 
> baggage for
> something as low level as BEEP.)

I lost interest when I saw the XML mentions.

> I don't really get why some software engineers seem to think 
> that in
> 20xx they can write up a series of code-numbered legalese-esque
> documents (and with no formatting, and with baked-in page-breaks
> despite being in electronic format), and expect that people 
> will pay
> attention to it.

The horrific formatting of those RFCs surprised me also.

> It's kinda like how academic folk will write overly-convoluted 
> (almost
> patent-like) explanations, employ other forms of obfuscation 
> such as
> calling a summary or intro an "abstract" (just because some 
> outdated
> standard tells them to), stick it all into a multi-column PDF, 
> and then
> wonder why the non-academic side never bothers to pay any 
> attention.

You assume they want someone to pay attention.  The real goal is 
slip under the radar, keep collecting the free government money 
for doing nothing of any import.