std.experimental – DConf?

Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu May 29 12:54:29 PDT 2014


On Thu, 29 May 2014 15:15:27 -0400, ponce <contact at gam3sfrommars.fr> wrote:

>
> On what criterion do you filter applicants for std.experimental then?
>

Same way we do it for std.

I think there is a confusion here. std.experimental should be for code  
that hasn't been proven, but generally acceptable to the community as a  
good phobos inclusion.

The central issues are:

1. We have code that is in phobos that sucks, but we can't get rid of it  
because now it's in phobos and people depend on it staying there or at  
least keeping the same API (e.g. std.xml).
2. We are super-paranoid to add code to phobos out of fear that it may  
turn out to suck, and then we can't get rid of it (e.g. std.log or  
std.benchmark).

This is like a test drive before buying a car. By giving access on  
std.experimental, we are saying "We think we want this library, test drive  
it for a while, see what you think," and if we all like it, it will move  
to std.

Yes, we could just say that about some code.dlang.org project, but it  
doesn't have the same exposure, no matter how much we want people to use  
dub. It's like the difference between the dealer bringing out the car for  
you to test drive, and telling you to go find it yourself in the lot.

-Steve


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list