std.experimental repo

[XavierAP via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 25 March 2017 at 14:20:53 UTC, Seb wrote:
>
> So in short: as long as a library is in active development, 
> it's its death to put it into the standard library.

That could be different for std.experimental.*? Or does that work 
only when development comes directly from the Foundation? Should 
it be different?

Nothing against having very useful and established libraries also 
outside Phobos, if it's more agile. If Boost had to be inside the 
C++ standard we would have never had Boost or C++11. I like to 
think Phobos is less rigid than C++ standard but still.