Initial feedback for std.experimental.image

[Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d]

On 7/07/2015 4:55 a.m., Meta wrote:
> On Monday, 6 July 2015 at 13:48:53 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
>> I believe it is ready for initial feedback because I feel it is moving
>> towards "controversial" territory in its design. With the file format
>> support.
>> I just need to know that I am going in the right direction as of now.
>> There is no point in continuing the image reading/writing support like
>> it is, if nobody likes it.
>
> For ImageStorage, why provide both pixelAt/pixelStoreAt (bad naming IMO)
> and opIndex/opIndexAssign?

So it can be used here: 
http://cattermole.co.nz/phobosImage/docs/html/std_experimental_image_interfaces.html#.SwappableImage

Reasons why this could have been a problem:
http://cattermole.co.nz/phobosImage/docs/html/std_experimental_image_interfaces.html#.ImageStorage.opIndex
vs
http://cattermole.co.nz/phobosImage/docs/html/std_experimental_image_interfaces.html#.ImageStorageOffset.opIndex

In other words, overloads. Operator overloads here are just syntax candy 
which is required for everyday use. But the functions are required so 
they can be used as delegate pointers in other types.

If you want another name, please suggest them! After all, I only came up 
with it at like 3am.