Vote: deprecate std.xml?
Ernesto Castellotti
erny.castell at gmail.com
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