On 6/13/15 11:49 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 00:24:51 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So we have:
* 1 request to change names;
* 3 requests to wank around the directory structure;
* 0 of everything else.
Sigh.
That is to be expected and intended for formal Phobos review.
Implementation is not of much interest - it can be fixed at any point.
Most important thing is to ensure that API feels right, documentation
feels clear and people are in general comfortable with using proposed
modules as they are.
I will do more in-depth review but it will _all_ be about API and docs
and naming.
Suggestions for better names are welcome as addenda, and I will act on
some, but they're no substitute for competent reviews.
We need as a community to learn how to do good reviews. Anyone can put a
finger on a name of a thing and say they like another name better.
ANYONE. Real review of a library is figuring out how well the proposed
library's abstractions fulfill its charter and intended use cases.
Andrei
