Release D 2.079.0

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 3/6/18 3:50 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 at 12:21:41 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> That being said, I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to have 
>> std.experimental be in its own repository. This allows selection of 
>> the dependency on std.experimental separate from phobos. It still 
>> would be an "official" dlang package, and might even be included in 
>> the distribution (the latest version anyway), and docs included on the 
>> website. But if needed, you could have your dub package depend on a 
>> prior version.
> 
> The entire concept needs a reexamination IMO. I just checked the git 
> history, and not one module has graduated from std.experimental to 
> mainline Phobos since the idea's inception in 2014. While it's possible 
> that none of the modules are ready, logger has been there for four years 
> now. I was against changing how experimental is handled in the past, but 
> I recently have started to rethink how we promote modules.

Promotion of modules is a different discussion. I think std.experimental 
is fine as a project, but just needs to be decoupled with needed 
compiler and stable library fixes.

To put it in terms of Atila's reference, it's like we coupled the 
breaking changes of boost-experimental with critical clang fixes.

> Also, if you'll allow me to have crazy ideas for a moment, one wonders 
> why we shouldn't just release Phobos itself through dub? Rust makes 
> people use their build tool, why not us?

No. Phobos has a reasonably stable API, and we need to keep it that way. 
There are too many coupled changes with Phobos and DMD that I think we 
would be asking for a mountain of "Why is this version of Phobos not 
compatible with this version of DMD?" bugs.

-Steve