On 26 August 2010 04:58, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a very interesting discussion, with great points. Here's what I > think - in brief, my experience time and again has been that stuff that has > a strong champion behind it succeeds, and stuff that doesn't, doesn't. In > light of that, if Benjamin and/or David are enthused about pushing their > libraries into Phobos, and furthermore maintaining and enhancing them, and > further-furthermore contributing in new ways to Phobos, then I think it's > not crucial that dimensional analysis (and possibly rational numbers) are of > narrow utility. > > One less positive example is std.json - after adding it to Phobos, Jeremie > didn't hang around to maintain it, bring its style on par with the rest of > Phobos etc. Right now it's a library in need of a champion. Not to mention > the likes of std.xml :o).
How about std.openrj in Phobos1! That's a situation we desperately want to avoid. > So, subject to the rest of the team being approving too, I'd say let's give > dimensional analysis (and rational numbers too if David wants) a fair shot > at inclusion in Phobos. Be prepared for ruthlessness though :o). That seems a fair argument. _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
