On Wednesday, November 17, 2010 09:20:47 Jesse Phillips wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 3:13 AM, spir <[email protected]> wrote: > > What about learning from other languages' stdlib implementation & > > evolution? More generally, about language development process? Python is > > an example in this domain (clear set of builtin features(*), 1 need <--> > > 1 tool(*), transition phases, deprecation warnings, PEPs...); maybe the > > evolution process (PEPs & 2 mailing lists) is just a bit too > > complicated. > > You can write up a DIP if you desire: > > http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs > > It is somewhat official, and a little manual, but this is the > currently accepted way to create and document a requested change for > discussion and revision.
Except that it's obviously pretty much never used. There a grant total of 8 DIPs with the first one being only an example. It may very well be that we should start using DIPs as a major part of Phobos development (or something similar to DIPs rather than DIPs, since arguably DIPs are for the language itself rather than the standard library - maybe PIP (Phobos Improvement Proposal) or DLIP (D Library Improvement Proposal)), but they obviously aren't really be used at this point. I do think that it's clear though that we need to start thinking about how to better organize and formalize some aspects of Phobos development - especially once we reach the point that we want it to be relatively stable. Right now, the whole process is very ad hoc, which has worked so far, but as we get closer to serious stability and as more people work on Phobos (be it by actually being on the dev team with commit access or by submitting bug fixes or modules for possible inclusion), it's going to need to become more organized. There isn't much with a clear process at this point, and that's going to make making real progress more difficult. One thing that really struct me with some of the posts about Go recently and its one year birthday was how many developers they had who had submitted to the project. It was _way_ more than we have, and I get the impression that they're progressing far faster than we are. That doesn't mean that we want to do things the way that they do or have as many people contributing as they do, but the current process can't handle that kind of participation, and we are going to need more participation if we want Phobos to grow and progress faster. - Jonathan M Davis _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
