std.experimental.checkedint is ready for comments!

[tsbockman via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 16 June 2016 at 12:25:39 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
>> Pull requests are routinely reviewed in an upside-down fashion:
>>
>> 1) Formatting
>> 2) Typos
>> 3) Names
>> 4) Tests (and names again)
>> 6) Docs (and names)
>> 8) Design (and more about names)
>> 9) Does this even belong in Phobos?
>>
>> I don't think people are doing it on purpose - it's just 
>> easier to start
>> with the trivial nit-picks, because you don't need a deep 
>> understanding
>> of the code and the problem domain (or decision-making 
>> authority) to
>> complain about a missing ' ' or something.
>
> I can see how that could be happening. Often (and in this case) 
> there are different folks touching on the different points.

Yes, it's mostly a process issue, not an individual one. See my 
earlier reply to John Colvin, for a practical suggestion as to 
how to improve with this.