• Jonathan M Davis (11/11) Jun 21 2011 Is the curl wrapper at about the point that we could look at doing a for...
• Nick Sabalausky (4/21) Jun 21 2011 Or if not, what about the new std.path? I've been looking forward to tha...
• Jonathan M Davis (8/33) Jun 21 2011 No. Unfortunately, Lars is going on vacation for a couple of weeks (and ...
• jdrewsen (5/16) Jun 22 2011 I've got a couple of small features that I would like to add before it

Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:

Is the curl wrapper at about the point that we could look at doing a formal 
review of it followed by voting for inclusion in Phobos, or does it need more 
bake time? It's fine either way. I'd just like to know where it sits.

If it's ready for review, then we can start a formal review process for it. If 
not, then Andrei has a pull request which would create a std.benchmark (though 
a good chunk of it is from std.datetime) which some of expressed the desire to 
have formally reviewed rather than just reviewed on github. So, if the curl 
wrapper isn't ready for review yet, then we can review that.

So, is the curl wrapper about ready for formal review, or does it need more 
bake time first?

- Jonathan M Davis

"Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:

"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.1107.1308711970.14074.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...
 Is the curl wrapper at about the point that we could look at doing a 
 formal
 review of it followed by voting for inclusion in Phobos, or does it need 
 more
 bake time? It's fine either way. I'd just like to know where it sits.

 If it's ready for review, then we can start a formal review process for 
 it. If
 not, then Andrei has a pull request which would create a std.benchmark 
 (though
 a good chunk of it is from std.datetime) which some of expressed the 
 desire to
 have formally reviewed rather than just reviewed on github. So, if the 
 curl
 wrapper isn't ready for review yet, then we can review that.

 So, is the curl wrapper about ready for formal review, or does it need 
 more
 bake time first?

Or if not, what about the new std.path? I've been looking forward to that. 
'Course, curl would certainly be good too (and probably more important).

Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:

On 2011-06-21 20:44, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote in message
 news:mailman.1107.1308711970.14074.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...
 
 Is the curl wrapper at about the point that we could look at doing a
 formal
 review of it followed by voting for inclusion in Phobos, or does it need
 more
 bake time? It's fine either way. I'd just like to know where it sits.
 
 If it's ready for review, then we can start a formal review process for
 it. If
 not, then Andrei has a pull request which would create a std.benchmark
 (though
 a good chunk of it is from std.datetime) which some of expressed the
 desire to
 have formally reviewed rather than just reviewed on github. So, if the
 curl
 wrapper isn't ready for review yet, then we can review that.
 
 So, is the curl wrapper about ready for formal review, or does it need
 more
 bake time first?

 
 Or if not, what about the new std.path? I've been looking forward to that.
 'Course, curl would certainly be good too (and probably more important).

No. Unfortunately, Lars is going on vacation for a couple of weeks (and he's 
the one whose been reworking std.path), so that's not going to work. And Jose 
is going to be gone for a month or so as well, so we can't review his 
implementation of std.log either. Otherwise, they'd be up for review.

At the moment, the only possibilities that I'm aware of are the curl wrapper 
and std.benchmark.

- Jonathan M Davis

jdrewsen <jdrewsen nospam.com> writes:

Den 22-06-2011 05:05, Jonathan M Davis skrev:
 Is the curl wrapper at about the point that we could look at doing a formal
 review of it followed by voting for inclusion in Phobos, or does it need more
 bake time? It's fine either way. I'd just like to know where it sits.

 If it's ready for review, then we can start a formal review process for it. If
 not, then Andrei has a pull request which would create a std.benchmark (though
 a good chunk of it is from std.datetime) which some of expressed the desire to
 have formally reviewed rather than just reviewed on github. So, if the curl
 wrapper isn't ready for review yet, then we can review that.

 So, is the curl wrapper about ready for formal review, or does it need more
 bake time first?

 - Jonathan M Davis

I've got a couple of small features that I would like to add before it 
is ready for review. But I think it'll be ready within a week or so.

If std.benchmark is ready then let's do that one first.

/Jonas