| I logged back into the forums to try and find it, but I didn't see a way to pull up old posts. IIRC, the issue I posted about had to do with some of the underlying parsers. I was looking at the CSV stuff and I believe one of the types it relies on had a skipBOM function, or one of the functions would skip the BOM, or something along those lines. But what it did was blindly increment the file pointer without checking it was looking at a BOM, or that it was at the start of the file. To me the interface is a fairly big deal because you can't safely use the type without knowing that implementation behavior. People do stupid crap, and calling skipBOM at the wrong time will happen, even though it's obviously not intended. What I recall is recommending that it either fail noisily or turn into a noop. I'm on the side of failing noisily to help users of the class find their bugs quicker, but I can understand why someone would want it to be a noop since technically doing nothing if it's not a BOM is the right thing to do. The response I got was the type wasn't meant to be part of the public interface for the stdlib and so wasn't an issue, and then I was pretty much ignored after that statement. I even offered to do the work myself, but pretty much got ignored. It wasn't so much that the reaction was negative, as much as it wasn't conducive to improving the stdlib all that much. And from my perspective, one of the biggest problem nim had (at the time) is that the stdlib felt very unpolished. As if someone had written it for very specific use cases and then haven't revisited it. I guess what I'm saying is that it didn't feel like an stdlib in many places, it felt like someone who wrote some production code for very specific use cases. Which is perfectly acceptable for production code with a specific use case, but not for an stdlib (in my opinion). The entire thing left a bad taste in my mouth and I lost a lot of trust in the quality of the stdlib and so decided to stop learning/using nim. It's all a little fuzzy in my mind, so I may not have all the details correct but the loss of trust was definitely the result. And who knows, perhaps I was misreading the code, I wasn't all that experienced with nim at the time. But even having someone point out it was my mistake would have felt better than simply being ignored. It's too bad really, because I did like the language itself, which is why I had offered to try and help improve the stdlib. Nowadays I'm picking up rust for fun(putting together an NES emulator in it). I'm a little bit of a language whore :) |
From looking at the thread, it seems that this is a simple case of your thread becoming lost in the noise of the forum. Please don't feel that you were ignored on purpose. I think that Araq simply forgot to reply to you, it's easy for threads to get lost like this.
It really sucks, but the fact is that Araq doesn't have enough time to answer everyone and in this case he is the only one who could have assisted you.
In all honesty I think this is quite common in forums. I'm not sure how we can improve it, short of getting full-time Nim devs who ensure that everyone on the forum gets a response. What do you think?