On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 05:10:17 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> This is the voting thread to decide if the proposed addition to Phobos, std.experimental.ndslice, should be accepted.
>
> To vote, please respond to this post. You have three options:
>

Yes

On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 17:07:06 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 06:07:15 UTC, Meta wrote:
>> Is std.experimental also on the table, or directly to phobos?
>
> Not quite sure what you're asking here, but if you're asking if this is going into stdx first, then the answer is yes. Things that go into stdx aren't supposed to change that much.

Ok, your wording about the API freezing seemed to imply that it would go directly into Phobos without spending some time in std.experimental.

Anyway, I'm not familiar with the subject domain, so I'll abstain from voting. I will say however that the documentation could use some work.

Yes

Hope to see a Matrix (multidimensional, if possible) class with this.

On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 22:16:35 UTC, Tanel Tagaväli wrote:
> Yes
>
> Hope to see a Matrix (multidimensional, if possible) class with this.

What matrix features are missing in ndslice except matrix multiplication?

On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 05:10:17 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> This is the voting thread to decide if the proposed addition to Phobos, std.experimental.ndslice, should be accepted.
>
> To vote, please respond to this post. You have three options:
>
> * Yes
> * Yes with a single condition
> * No

Yes! Image example is a good idea but I think it should not use external libraries. If someone starts with d/phobos probably won't download/configure another library to do some tests.

I suggest you to fix the example using ppm format.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netpbm_format#PPM_example

It's just a couple of "map!()" away. :)

Or bmp, it's not that complex to read in its common form.

Yes

On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 12:57:00 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
>> To vote, please respond to this post.
>
> Yes

I've contributed to both DMD and Phobos.

Yes with many conditions:

* Documentation
** The documentation needs a complete rewrite. If I hadn't had any prior knowledge, I would have needed to read the numpy documentation to figure what this package does. That is not acceptable. It is also not clear how the functionally in the package is supposed to work together, and how it interacts with the rest of phobos.
** Params, Returns ...

* Style
** the source code does not look like phobos
** s/assert (/assert(/g
** s/unittest {/unittest\n{/g
** unittest properties should be on the same line as the unittest keyword
** spaces between operators
** dfmt and some manuel work is your friend

* Testing
** most tests only use itoa, what about arrays what about arrays with user defined types. That's properly trivial but should be tested.
** interaction with rest of phobos. Can I call map on a Slice? If I can, it should be tested so that it still works after the next release.

* Miscellaneous
** string mixins. I think some of the string mixins can be removed for something more readable/debuggable
**

On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 05:10:17 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> This is the voting thread to decide if the proposed addition to Phobos, std.experimental.ndslice, should be accepted.
>
> [...]

Docs are hitting a server error.

On Wednesday, 16 December 2015 at 11:21:13 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 05:10:17 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
>> This is the voting thread to decide if the proposed addition to Phobos, std.experimental.ndslice, should be accepted.
>>
>> [...]
>
> Docs are hitting a server error.

On Sunday, 13 December 2015 at 05:21:49 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
> Docs fixed link: http://dtest.thecybershadow.net/artifact/website-13cbdcf17d84fc31328c3f517a56bea783c418d6-dd2292a424959b594956eeeba64d391f/web/phobos-prerelease/std_experimental_ndslice.html
>
> The latest docs always can be found at PullRequest's CyberShadow/DAutoTest