Jonathan M Davis: > There's plenty still in Phobos that needs to be reworked before it approaches > any kind of real frozen state (e.g. std.xml and std.stream), but we _do_ need > to evolve Phobos to the point that breaking changes are rare.
The problem is not just Phobos, but D itself, that needs some fixes. Regarding Phobos, there are Phobos modules that contain many good insights, ideas, and some design gems. But you can't release similar large things in one go, and then assume their API is frozen. I think the development style of Phobos has to change. I like the suggestion of putting modules into an experimental package, and to keep them there for some months, let users use them and find suboptimal parts, to avoid freezing what's unbaked still :-) Bye, bearophile
