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 should be 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 std.cpp instead.

The irony is D1 has std.c, and for D2 it was migrated to core.stdc.

...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.

Reply via email to