Vote: deprecate std.xml?

Ernesto Castellotti erny.castell at
Sat Jan 11 17:16:00 UTC 2020

On Saturday, 11 January 2020 at 17:11:03 UTC, JN wrote:
> On Saturday, 11 January 2020 at 16:44:03 UTC, Ernesto 
> Castellotti wrote:
>> [...]
> The problem with this is that 1) is a very hard step to 
> accomplish. There is actually std.experimental.xml, but it's 
> not complete enough to merge into std. It's much easier to 
> develop a non-std XML parser, because you can support only part 
> of functionality (read or write XML) and you can ignore rarely 
> used features like entities.
> As soon as you try to merge anything into std, new requirements 
> show up. The library needs to play well with ranges, most 
> people would want it to play nicely with @nogc, it would have 
> to support both reading and writing and should support most if 
> not all XML features.

What you say is certainly true, but how a removal without a 
replacement can improve the STD?

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list