On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 00:35:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> 
> Ideas?
>
> Andrei

std.experimental.rusty

On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 07:44:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> std.experimental.memory with submodules for the different use cases:
>
> std.experimental.memory.rc
> std.experimental.memory.gc
> std.experimental.memory.manual // or something

this has my vote

I guess the first submodule should be the allocators!?

On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 00:35:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Ideas?

import std.experimental.gcbypass;
import std.experimental.gcfreedom;
import std.experimental.shuntgc;
import std.experimental.rcinstead;
import std.experimental.manual;

On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 02:13:20 UTC, Ilya wrote:

> std.memory --Ilya

That's a good one.

On 01/14/2016 12:48 AM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 00:35:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Hey folks, I want to push things forward with artifacts dedicated to
>> avoiding the GC, and of course my main worry is finding the right name.
>>
>> An obvious choice is std.experimental.nogc but we know from Marketing
>> 101 that expressing something as a positive is better than a negative.
>> Another possibility is std.experimental.rc, but that's imprecise
>> because the artifacts in there will contain a variety of things in
>> addition to reference counting-related artifacts.
>>
>> Ideas?
>
> std.experimental.lifetime

noice -- Andrei

On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 07:44:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

> std.experimental.memory.rc
> std.experimental.memory.gc
> std.experimental.memory.manual // or something

+1

On 01/14/2016 09:50 AM, bachmeier wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 January 2016 at 07:44:16 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>
>> std.experimental.memory.rc
>> std.experimental.memory.gc
>> std.experimental.memory.manual // or something
>
> +1

I don't see how this categorization works. E.g. there's no need for special tooling related to the GC. -- Andrei

On 2016-01-14 15:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> I don't see how this categorization works. E.g. there's no need for
> special tooling related to the GC. -- Andrei

It was just a couple of suggestions. I don't know exactly what you're going to include in this module.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 01/14/2016 10:46 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2016-01-14 15:52, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> I don't see how this categorization works. E.g. there's no need for
>> special tooling related to the GC. -- Andrei
>
> It was just a couple of suggestions. I don't know exactly what you're
> going to include in this module.

Me neither, which adds to the problem :o). -- Andrei

On 2016-01-14 17:11, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> Me neither, which adds to the problem :o). -- Andrei

You need to at least have some ideas, otherwise there's no point in a new module :)

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg