Michel Fortin Wrote: > While it seems acceptable to use "stdio" in "std.c.stdio", since we're > wrapping the C header of the same name, I see little justification in > repeating the "std" in the module name for "std.stdio". Why not change > it to "std.io"? > > (same comment apply to other "std.std*" modules) > > I first noticed the strangeness of this when I was new to D, but today > I mistakenly wrote "import std.io;", which felt more natural, is > shorter and reads way better than "import std.stdio;", which triggered > the question. > > -- > Michel Fortin > [email protected] > http://michelf.com/ >
Nice question! I also quite don't understand why Phobos doesn't take advantage of hierarchical modules structure. For example, I/O is a large cathegory and a lot of elements belongs to it. Console I/O is just one of example, but there is also network I/O, DMA etc. I believe it is much better to put each independent element in its own module (to reduce intermodular dependencies etc). For example, I put each class in a separate module. I believe it makes analyzing source code *a lot* easier.
