521 days, 22 hours, 7 minutes and 52 seconds...

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 1/26/15 11:48 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:33:32AM -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On 1/26/15 10:17 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> [...]
>>> But OTOH, if *this* is what it takes to contribute a new module to
>>> Phobos, then it's no wonder we have trouble finding contributors...
>>> Most would give up before they even try. I think there's an imbalance
>>> here between the quality of existing Phobos modules vs. the quality
>>> expected of future Phobos modules. Whatever happened to incremental
>>> refinement??  Do we really expect flawless perfection before merging
>>> to, of all places, std.*experimental*?
>>
>> For a good while there was no std.experimental. Its introduction was
>> partially motivated by the stalemate of this contribution. -- Andrei
>
> And yet it still took so long to get it in?
>
> IMO a better approach would have been, merge it into std.experimental
> sooner, then submit followup PRs to std.experimental when the
> implementation is found to be inferior.

Of course. I repeat: for a long time std.experimental was not an option. 
Clearly it's better with it than without, and merging into 
std.experimental first, std later, will be the way we roll. -- Andrei