std.xml should just go

[Daniel Gibson]

Am 03.02.2011 22:45, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:41:08 -0500, Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Am 03.02.2011 22:26, schrieb Steven Schveighoffer:
>>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:03:55 -0500, Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 03.02.2011 21:48, schrieb Tomek Sowiński:
>>>>> Speaking of Tango, may I look at it? I remember that beef over the first
>>>>> datetime and it gives me shivers...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You probably shouldn't look at the source.
>>>> I dunno about the interface (documentation) - it's certainly not illegal to
>>>> take
>>>> inspiration from it, but maybe then people will again claim that source was
>>>> stolen.. but when you claim that you haven't looked at the source it may be
>>>> ok..
>>>
>>> It has been posited by Tango's developers that simply looking at the
>>> documentation of a D library isn't enough to understand the library, you
>>> probably have looked at the source.  Until they change that opinion, I would
>>> avoid even the documentation.
>>>
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/phobos/2010-April/000370.html
>>>
>>> The pertinent quote from there:
>>>
>>> "In my opinion, claiming a clean room implementation of an API in D is
>>> difficult, if for no other reason that it is (due to imperfect doc generation
>>> etc) somewhat difficult to properly study a D API without at the same time
>>> reading the source (or glimpsing at it)."
>>>
>>
>> They can claim whatever they want.. if Tomek says he only looked at the
>> documentation (for an idea how a good interface for a XML lib may look like)
>> they can hardly prove anything.
> 
> This exact situation was the case of the prior-mentioned infringement accusation.
> 
> -Steve

Was it? I thought the Author *had* looked at the Tango source but claimed not to
have used it?

Claiming that looking at the documentation isn't sufficient to understand how
the API works (from a users point of view, not internally) is pretty stupid:
1. it insults the modules author(s) ("You're too stupid to write meaningful
documentation")
2. even if the documentation sucks one may have understood how to the API is
used by looking at code examples using it...

Well, however, so Tomek should probably not even look at the docs..

But when a possible API for the module is discussed maybe people with Tango
experience can contribute ideas (if the Tango XML API is any good, so far I've
only heard that their implementation is very fast, but nothing about usability).

(This situation really sucks. It's unbelievable how much FUD that prior incident
has created.)

Cheers,
- Daniel