this package offers a functionality which is so commonly desirable and so ‘natural’ and that in my humble opinion makes this package worthy of being in the StdLib,
what do you guys think?
I’m not qualified to judge that kind of thing but I can say that it has been essential in most of my applications for performance. I guess it could be done a bit cleaner if it was more integrated into the language.
I can say I’ve never used it. 
There have also been discussions about adding stuff into the “standard library”. The problem is anything added into Julia has to maintain backward compatibility and increases the test surface area. Additionally new features can only be released with new versions of Julia. This actually slows the development down of that package.
I believe there is a running line in Python circles that the standard library is where modules go to die and they are trying to avoid that with Julia.
4 Likes
Just to add to this, my understanding is that the criterion for inclusion in the standard library isn’t really how useful it is, but rather partly for historical reasons and partly for what’s needed to support the package manager.
There was some discussion of being able to version standard libraries separately from base Julia at some point; I wonder if that happens whether that will affect the inclusion criteria.
2 Likes
i see! thank you guys for the feedback
1 Like