Phobos version naming

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 11/4/21 2:12 AM, Max Samukha wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 November 2021 at 00:46:35 UTC, Adam Ruppe wrote:
> 
>> For example we might not actually use "Stdv2" but instead "std2023". 
>> In years prior to that, it is now obviously a future version and thus 
>> subject to change, then when 2023 comes along, it is officially 
>> stablized and we can start playing with std 2024.
>>
> 
> What if it's behind schedule? You'd have to explain to people in 2025 
> why the future version name is std2023. Also, std2023 is ugly.

Interestingly enough that's what happened to C++. The draft was C++0x 
for a long time until they realized they can't make it by 2010. The 
standard was ultimately C++11, and it was refreshed every three years 
right on schedule.

I can't understate just how successful their process is. We'd do good to 
learn from it.