"Dicebot" <pub...@dicebot.lv> Wrote in message: > What keeps bothering me is this: imagine something has not passed > vote for std.experimental inclusion. That means that some changes > will happen, one more voting and it will eventually get there one > release later. > > And if has passed the vote, effectively the same stuff happens - > changes are done, staging period prolonged and we get to the very > same point. Only difference is that earlier versions of the > module don't get wider user exposure. > > Now that I see several comments here seeking for certain > stability even in std.experimental and can understand why later > exposure can be a good thing. That, however, makes me even more > convinced that "experimental" is a terrible name for that package > and we are using it purely as staging are instead. >
std.purgatory
