Formal review of std.buffer.scopebuffer

[Dicebot]

On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 15:37:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 3/17/14, 6:57 AM, Dicebot wrote:
>> Closing this seeing as Andrei has just merged it as 
>> std.internal into
>> master. I am very angry about the way it has happened.
>
> What happened now??
>
> Andrei

1)
Walter has been pushing for getting this through the review queue 
to the point where I needed to ask Brian to delay voting for his 
module and switch to proceeding with Walter's. It didn't do any 
harm this time as Brian got busy anyway but I am very unhappy 
that I even had to do it.

Now it suddenly gets cancelled and merged, internal or not (the 
very existence of std.internal rings a bell but it is a different 
story). Why bother me and push on Brian if you are just going to 
hurry merge it?

2)
There has been several very important concerns raised by 
monarch_dodra about how this specific implementation fits into D 
type system. He still finds absolutely horrible lines of code in 
that PR thread right here and now. I am absolutely ashamed of the 
fact that we have now non-legacy code in Phobos that breaks the 
immutable/const system (most recent finding).

Some of such concerns has been straight rejected with appeal to 
authority and those who asked have been treated as if it is their 
guilt. You can't both try to sell D as community project and 
practice such workflow.

3)
I have been asking in that PR why this proposal is even 
considered urgent when it looks like unexpected emergency focus 
put in completely wrong moment, before addressing basic issue of 
same domain. It wasn't only my question but also seconded by 
Martin Nowak. There is only one answer from Walter which does not 
actually answer any of those questions but continues that 
ridiculous "performance-performance-performance" main line.

This looks terribly like panic-driven development.