On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 23:24:53 -0400, Jesse Phillips
<jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 June 2013 at 02:46:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Any code ready for review must have a clear indication of how the API
will look when it's pulled into Phobos. If it's not to that state, the
code cannot really be reviewed as a possible contribution to Phobos.
I have to stop you there, it appears your premise is off. This is not
about the API being ready for Phobos, this is about having a pull
request-able submission.
Having a pull requestable submission requires having an API ready for
phobos. How do you have step 2 without step 1?
As you say a little bit later the implementation details can be worked
out later, or what I'm advocating, we can decided where his util parts
fit into Phobos later.
So where is the API? The link you posted is not ready to be part of
Phobos, and there is no clear indication of how it will reside in Phobos.
Please make that clear.
-Steve
