[alexdowad]

Mr. Courtice, your cautious and restrained assessment of the value of your own work is appreciated. I applaud your humility and like to think that I would take a similar approach in your position.

However, you have not really answered the big question which others who are interested in your work would like to understand. To mix metaphors, you are dancing around the elephant in the room.

You are welcome to keep dancing around that elephant if you wish. If you are ready to stop dancing, then:

In what ways, if any, do you aspire for Ripl to achieve (objective or subjective) superiority over other libraries "of similar feature-set"? Is it intended to offer better performance? An API which some users might prefer? A smaller deliverable code size? An implementation which is easier to understand? Or something else?

You stated that your goal is to achieve "feature/stability parity", but is that really it? Or is there something else?