Sean Kelly wrote:
Sergey Gromov wrote:
Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:40:28 -0700,
Sean Kelly wrote:
Don wrote:
We also now have two modules called 'bitmanip', which is somewhat
ironic since we brainstormed for ages trying to come up with a
better name for it. Modules with duplicate names have caused linking
problems in the past -- not sure if that applies here.
It applies if the modules from both Phobos and druntime end up in the
same library on *nix. Windows doesn't appear to have the same issue.
But I'd love to hear suggestions for alternative names-- I'm not
terribly good at naming modules :-p.
Also, any I'd like to see how people feel about having three
top-level packages in druntime vs. one-- an alternative I'd
considered was to put everything under core.
I actually was expecting all the runtime stuff to be in core.* and was
surprised to find std and sys there.
I didn't even create core until just recently--before that, the modules
in core were global, much like object. So my thoughts on the druntime
package layout are still evolving. I do now think that having a single
top-level package would probably be best, but figured I'd solicit
opinions before changing anything.
Sean
I am all for one toplevel package too.
