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.

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 .

Reply via email to