On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:44:56 +0200, Simen Kjaeraas wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:42:05 +0200, Sean Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Don wrote: >>> 'std', 'stdc' and 'sys' sound OK to me. Although is there any reason >>> why stdc couldn't be part of 'sys'? >>> IMHO: 'common' sounds far too generic. 'core' is borderline. >> >> My current thought is to have: >> >> core/ >> stdc/ >> sys/posix >> sys/windows >> >> (yes, I'm planning to move posix support out of stdc) >> >> Alternatives to core are: lang, d, base... But I like core the best so >> far. >> >> >> Sean > > core is good. d or base also, but I think core is the best.
I like core. std better if phobos would step aside, for the reasons already stated.
