On Wednesday, 18 March 2015 at 00:55:45 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> as an addendum, vibe.d reimplements huge amounts of phobos, is there a reason none of this is ever getting upstreamed?

Getting something into Phobos is a huge commitment. For something widely used like json library the API discissions can destroy your spare time in blink of an eye. Sonke actually attempted to do that at some point, you can see http://forum.dlang.org/thread/lt5s76$is$1@digitalmars.com#post-lt5s76:24is:241:40digitalmars.com for what happened.

On Friday, 20 March 2015 at 16:02:23 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> Getting something into Phobos is a huge commitment.

And it ties your hands and comes with all kinds of annoying trivial nonsense baggage like spaces vs tabs.

I have a hard enough time bringing myself to write small functions for phobos due to the sum total of these little pains. I certainly wouldn't want to go through that for a whole module, it is so much easier to just tell people to download the file from my own website.

On 3/20/15 9:02 AM, Dicebot wrote:
> On Wednesday, 18 March 2015 at 00:55:45 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>> as an addendum, vibe.d reimplements huge amounts of phobos, is there a
>> reason none of this is ever getting upstreamed?
>
> Getting something into Phobos is a huge commitment.

Not documentation.

> For something widely
> used like json library the API discissions can destroy your spare time
> in blink of an eye. Sonke actually attempted to do that at some point,
> you can see
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/lt5s76$is$1@digitalmars.com#post-lt5s76:24is:241:40digitalmars.com
> for what happened.

What happened is that the design has been approved (I emailed Sönke personally) but he moved places so he didn't have time.

Yes, it is a time commitment. When it wasn't you get things like std.json.


Andrei

On 3/20/15 9:09 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Friday, 20 March 2015 at 16:02:23 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> Getting something into Phobos is a huge commitment.
>
> And it ties your hands and comes with all kinds of annoying trivial
> nonsense baggage like spaces vs tabs.

I disagree with this characterization. When they do occur reviews are helpful. In this particular case a professional chooses spaces without so much as thinking about it.

> I have a hard enough time bringing myself to write small functions for
> phobos due to the sum total of these little pains. I certainly wouldn't
> want to go through that for a whole module, it is so much easier to just
> tell people to download the file from my own website.

The short version is you'd do immense good if you chose to contribute to Phobos.


Andrei

On Saturday, 21 March 2015 at 00:30:42 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 3/20/15 9:02 AM, Dicebot wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 18 March 2015 at 00:55:45 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>> as an addendum, vibe.d reimplements huge amounts of phobos, is there a
>>> reason none of this is ever getting upstreamed?
>>
>> Getting something into Phobos is a huge commitment.
>
> Not documentation.
>
>> For something widely
>> used like json library the API discissions can destroy your spare time
>> in blink of an eye. Sonke actually attempted to do that at some point,
>> you can see
>> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/lt5s76$is$1@digitalmars.com#post-lt5s76:24is:241:40digitalmars.com
>> for what happened.
>
> What happened is that the design has been approved (I emailed Sönke personally) but he moved places so he didn't have time.
>
> Yes, it is a time commitment. When it wasn't you get things like std.json.

It was a response to question "why vibe.d has reimplemented so many bits of Phobos without ever contributing it back".

On Sunday, 22 March 2015 at 10:36:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

> It was a response to question "why vibe.d has reimplemented so many bits of Phobos without ever contributing it back".

I apologize if it came off this way, I meant it as "vibe shouldn't have to be reimplementing these things, they're already in the stdlib so there's an obvious issue here"