On Tuesday, 25 November 2014 at 01:12:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/24/2014 4:51 PM, Brian Schott wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 November 2014 at 00:37:00 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
Anyone know anything about this?
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2n9gfb/d_is_for_data_science/cmbssac
You are posting to page 16 of the third iteration of a single
review.
I know, and the reddit comment refers to this.
This discussion is indeed most unsettling to read. Third review
of a much-needed module in the ecosystem, and I remember of
previous attempts at logging, each time taken down because it
does not satisfy the whims of top-tier D developers that would
have done it differently (and of course "better").
What is accepted or not in Phobos no longer interest me. I can
rely on interesting modules through DUB which has versionned
dependencies, while Phobos has not.
Better XML parsers/JSON parsers/serialization/argument parsers
exist outside of Phobos currently, and in my opinion maybe they
didn't belong there in the first place.
