On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 05:09:51PM +0000, Alexandru Ermicioi via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Saturday, 22 January 2022 at 05:43:55 UTC, Paul Backus wrote: > > On Friday, 21 January 2022 at 12:33:25 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: > > > ### Andrei > > > Andrei brought up std.v2, but this is where memory fails me. What I > > > do recall is that there was a bit of talk about the std.v2 namespace > > > and how it will live alongside std, and this came up because Robert > > > isn't convinced the planned approach is the right way to go about > > > it. If Andrei or anyone else would like to say more about what was > > > discussed, please post something below. > > > > IMO having the `std` and `std.v2` namespaces exist alongside each other > > *in the official D distribution* would be a mistake, and would make the > > language significantly less approachable for new users. > > Imho, current design where obsolete modules are moved from phobos to undead > is a lot better. Just keep newest stuff in phobos and move old one in undead > repo. Projects still relying on old functionality, can easily just import > old module from undead project and continue using old functionality, until > they move to newest one.
Is undead versioned? If Phobos starts innovating again, we may need to keep multiple old versions in undead for old codebases to continue working. T -- Perhaps the most widespread illusion is that if we were in power we would behave very differently from those who now hold it---when, in truth, in order to get power we would have to become very much like them. -- Unknown