rikki cattermole rikki at cattermole.co.nz
Wed Oct 16 21:59:11 UTC 2019

On 17/10/2019 6:20 AM, berni44 wrote:
> In the feedback thread H. S. Teoh is talking about that we need a 
> new/better version of Phobos. I remember having read the same in a 
> comment on some PR recently. How would this better version look like? Is 
> there allready any picture of what we do want? One says, if you don't 
> know the goal, all paths are the wrong ones...
> A few things that I remember from various sources:
> * Some improvement in the realm of ranges.
> * Replacement of some old modules. (std.xml, std.outbuffer, std.socket, 
> what else?)
> * Adding some missing modules (std.eventloop, std.database, what else?)
> * Unifying some modules (everything covering selfinspection, like 
> std.traits and so on, whar else?)
> Anything more?

I expect to start work on std.eventloop as part of the (informal) 
graphics workgroup soon-ish (although it may not end up as part of Phobos).

However my main concern with developing a new version of Phobos is 
isInputRange and friends will still exist. Unless the language has a 
better way of describing it e.g. signatures we may as well call it an 
incremental improvement not a new version.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list