On Wednesday, 27 August 2014 at 06:50:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/26/2014 5:32 PM, Mike wrote:
We currently have std.c and core.stdc. I believe core.stdc
migrated to std.c, not the other way around. And before we
make the same
mistake with core.stdcpp, we should set a new precedent with
The irony is D1 has std.c, and for D2 it was migrated to
...and design takes the backseat to convenience.
Moving it back in an endless search for taxonomical perfection
just jerks the users around. We've done a lot of renaming in
the runtime library, and an awful lot of ink has been spilled
on the subject in these forums.
But I'm not aware of a single user gained by these changes, and
I suspect we've lost a few, not because they didn't like the
newer names, but because they disliked the constant disruption
of their code base.
I completely understand and sympathize. This is most unfortunate.