std.xml should just go

[Brad Roberts]

On 2/2/2011 3:33 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> For a while we've espoused the strategy of keeping std.xml in Phobos until something better comes along.
> 
> But recently we've started to rethink that.
> 
> Pretty much everyone who tries std.xml ends up disappointed. Anyone who wants to bash D has std.xml as an easy pick.
> Anyone who looks at speed comparisons sees std.xml there like a sore thumb. Finally, the mere existence of a package, no
> matter how inadequate, stifles the initiative of others working on it.
> 
> This all makes std.xml a net liability. It's not better than nothing; it's worse than nothing.
> 
> Should we nuke it?
> 
> 
> Andrei

How sure are you about the assertion?  I haven't used it nor am likely to, but I also have trouble ruling out the
potential that there's users for which it works and they just aren't talking about it here.  This forum is, like it or
not, a minority of the user base.  Certainly the vocal people are the minority.

I'm not against replacement, but I'd be concerned about removal before a replacement is available.

Later,
Brad