On Sunday, 6 September 2015 at 04:20:36 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> On 6/09/2015 2:47 AM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> But you are going to do high level refactoring too, right? Not just
>> local conversions into foreachs and the like?
>>
>
> Of course.  Some of this was been started before the conversion.

This is great Daniel! +1000

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 12:38:41 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> It's not that phobos is bad, it's that we're following the same development pattern we had with C++.  We're using a conservative subset of D features and libraries, and slowly expanding what's acceptable. For example, DMD now uses foreach and delegates in a few places, and I expect we'll see a lot of use of D strings in the near future.

Is there any place where this is documented? For instance, what D constructs are currently allowed, whether/which phobos imports have started to be accepted, and so on?

On 8/09/2015 1:54 AM, "Luís Marques  <luis@luismarques.eu> wrote:
> On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 12:38:41 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>> It's not that phobos is bad, it's that we're following the same
>> development pattern we had with C++.  We're using a conservative
>> subset of D features and libraries, and slowly expanding what's
>> acceptable. For example, DMD now uses foreach and delegates in a few
>> places, and I expect we'll see a lot of use of D strings in the near
>> future.
>
> Is there any place where this is documented? For instance, what D
> constructs are currently allowed, whether/which phobos imports have
> started to be accepted, and so on?

No.