I'd be curious to know what a "complete" implementation is. I'm guessing no one other than the owners of the donated BTC can say for sure... and AFAIK, they haven't said yet.
The OP mentions "complete", which I imagine would be a coinjoin implementation which would be considered by Core Dev worthy of inclusion in the reference client (needing cosmetic, standardizing and/or translation changes or only). Now this may remain a theoretical assessment if the goal is to see 3rd party implementations such as blockchain.info's.
Coinmux *seems* very good, and must be a front-runner, subject to informed criticism such as the input from Cryddit.
@solex, I don't know if it's ever been articulated. That and the fact that the coins haven't moved was basically my gripe, not a specific jab at @nanobit (although, this is open-source software developed by volunteers: asking for time estimates is bad form).
Agreed.
I'll not take the "seems" statement as an insult.
Coinmux has got quite a way to go from where it is now to where i envision it when finished. And if "complete" means that the implementation is merged into the reference client, i'll never get there as i did not write it in C/C++ (and i'd probably end up writing some pretty shitty C/C++ anyway).