On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:27:11 +1000 Manu <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13 April 2013 00:04, Jesse Phillips <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Friday, 12 April 2013 at 06:25:10 UTC, Manu wrote: > > > >> I see this pattern where something is designed, discussed, and > >> then voted into phobos. At this time the design looks good on > >> paper, but there is very > >> little practical experience using the library. > >> The problem then is, once accepted, people start using it, and at > >> some point some issues are found, or ideas for improvement are > >> made based on user experience, but the module can no longer be > >> touched due to the general > >> phobia of making breaking changes... > >>
While I think you raise a very good point, I agree with the possible solutions Vladimir suggested in the original thread: Either add them straight to 'std' from the start and just mark it with a big red "EXPERIMENTAL" or perhaps more accurately "NEW MODULE - STILL SUBJECT TO CHANGE!", or make it super-easy to test such modules when they're in the review queue (perhaps via DUB?). Actually, I'd like to see *both*. The "exp vs std" suggestion *could* work, but I think it his a somewhat higher potential for unintended problems down the road.
