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