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
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.
I don't think the problem here is about naming. Both std.c and
core.stdc are good.
The problem is that you don't always want to bring libc and
libstdc++ with you with every single project you write.
Thus it shouldn't be in the runtime (except the very bit you
can't get rid of). It can still be core.stdc .