Case for std.experimental

[David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 29 July 2014 at 17:22:38 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> (Davis also supports this point)

To avoid confusion, let me point out that this was me (i.e., 
"David"), not Jonathan M. Davis.

> Reason why I find this strange is because it invalidates main 
> argument in favor of std.experimental over something like dub 
> package - making it easier to wider user case to try the 
> proposal and provide API feedback.

I think you got this precisely the wrong way round: Having 
something in Phobos makes it infinitely harder to meaningfully 
improve on a design, as the DMD release cycle takes the "rapid" 
out of "rapid iteration". Almost nobody builds 
DMD/druntime/Phobos from source in the grand scheme of things – 
pretty much only the core team and some of the forum regulars do.

Cheers,
David