On Saturday, 25 March 2017 at 16:50:18 UTC, XavierAP wrote:
On Saturday, 25 March 2017 at 14:20:53 UTC, Seb wrote:
So in short: as long as a library is in active development,
it's its death to put it into the standard library.
That could be different for std.experimental.*? Or does that
work only when development comes directly from the Foundation?
Should it be different?
That was kinda what I was hoping, there could be a 2nd
bikeshedding/review before graduating out of experimental, but
allowing the author to get some work done during the experimental
phase.
Nothing against having very useful and established libraries
also outside Phobos, if it's more agile. If Boost had to be
inside the C++ standard we would have never had Boost or C++11.
I like to think Phobos is less rigid than C++ standard but
still.
If there's 1 big library that's fine, but if you have to puzzle
together 5 small ones...
On Saturday, 25 March 2017 at 10:28:36 UTC, XavierAP wrote:
On Saturday, 25 March 2017 at 09:42:07 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
As a ndslice user, I long dreaded this day:
2.074.0: "std.experimental.ndslice has been removed"
Are you aware that ndslice is available at
https://github.com/libmir/mir-algorithm right?
yes, thanks.
