Formal review of std.buffer.scopebuffer

[Walter Bright]

On 3/17/2014 12:28 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2014-03-17 20:07, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> ScopeBuffer has been there and commented on for about 2 months now.
>
> That's because you created a pull request instead of asking for a formal review.
> A pull request should NOT be created until a module is accepted after a review
> and voting.
>
> You're sneaking in a new module although it has not gone through a formal
> review. This is not how new modules should be added.

Internal modules do not need the formal review process, since they are not 
documented and not part of the public facing API, any more than other changes to 
the internals of Phobos functions need such review.

The review of ScopeBuffer on the github PR threads has been far more thorough 
than about any other. It's up to 260 comments on about 50 lines of actual code 
over about 2 months.