std.data.json formal review

[Jay Norwood via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 13 August 2015 at 10:51:47 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
> I think we really need to have an informal pre-vote about the 
> BigInt and DOM efficiency vs. functionality issues. Basically 
> there are three options for each:
>
> 1. Keep them: May have an impact on compile time for big DOMs 
> (run time/memory consumption wouldn't be affected if a pointer 
> to BigInt is stored). But provides an out-of-the-box experience 
> for a broad set of applications.
>
> 2. Remove them: Results in a slim and clean API that is fast 
> (to run/compile), but also one that will be less useful for 
> certain applications.
>
> 3. Make them CT configurable: Best of both worlds in terms of 
> speed, at the cost of a more complex API.
>

I like this #3.  If I understand it correctly, this would provide 
the template to extend the supported data types, correct?

However, I also think that you shouldn't try to make the basic 
storage format handle everything that might be more appropriately 
handled by a meta-model.

Are the range operations compatible with the std.parallelism 
library?