What's going on with std.experimental.lexer?

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d]

On 10 June 2014 07:26, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:23:59 -0700
> Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 6/9/14, 2:15 PM, Dejan Lekic wrote:
>
>> > I am more for "stdx", which is what some developers already use as
>> > package name for experimental stuff.
>>
>> The way I see it is instead of explaining "stdx stands for the
>> experimental part of std" I'd rather use std.experimental which
>> explains itself.
>>
>> We added "immutable" after having explained to a million people
>> "invariant in this context means immutable".
>
> That and the fact that we'd like to avoid the javax disaster. std.experimental
> _should_ be annoyingly long and obvious. We want people to use it, but it
> needs to be clear that it's temporary and _experimental_ until it actually
> ends up in std.
>

I agree all the way with std.experimental as the package name.  Though
I might throw in an alternative argument to stdx and instead promote
unsafe.* or std.unsafe.  ;-)