Right after allocators: containers or database connectivity?

[Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 9 June 2015 at 17:05:19 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> Please help me choose what to work on next.

> One would be a good pass of std.container, in particular (a) a 
> design review with the DbI glasses on; (b) better documentation 
> - sadly it seems to me so inadequate as to make containers 
> themselves unusable; (c) investigate use of UFCS - 
> std.container's design predates UFCS yet is a perfect fit for 
> it, and most likely other cool language improvements we've 
> added since.

No plans to use std.allocator? I think containers are the next 
logical step after allocators, and will also serve as a proving 
ground for the allocator API.

One thing I'd like to note is that for any database connectivity 
solution to be future-proof, it needs to be based on (or 
compatible with) async I/O. Seeing as we still don't have async 
I/O in Phobos, I don't know how much that would influence the 
implementation.

There are some database drivers in the Vibe.d ecosystem, but my 
knowledge of these extends to just the above fact.