I don't use dub and I doubt I ever will.
As a ndslice user, I long dreaded this day:
2.074.0: "std.experimental.ndslice has been removed"
Well, I will deal with it, I was just thinking what could we do
better for the future?
What if experimental was in a sub repo? Then everyone who gets a
mo
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?
I believe the reason std.experimental.ndslic
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-al
On 25/03/2017 3:20 PM, Seb wrote:
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 a
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? S
On Saturday, 25 March 2017 at 14:20:53 UTC, Seb wrote:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/phexetutyelrssyru...@forum.dlang.org)
This has struck me from Ilya's post, as a problem that we had at
my previous job: code base of old platform too monolithic, not
modular enough; which in that case could t
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
wor