Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, February 23, 2013 18:39:10 H. S. Teoh wrote:
Alternatively, I would push for renaming the old std.process to
something like old.process (or something else), which is much less of a
breakage than deleting it from Phobos outright -- existing code just
need to have their imports fixed and will continue working, whereas
deleting the module outright leaves existing code with no recourse but
to potentially rewrite from scratch. This may be easier to convince
Walter & Andrei on, than outright killing old deprecated modules.
Possibly, but Walter takes a very dim view on most any code breakage, even if
it means simply changing a makefile to make your code work again, so I'd be
very surprised if he thought that moving the current std.process would be
acceptable. If Andrei could be convinced, then we could probably do it, but I
wouldn't expect him to agree, and IIRC, he had no problem with the
std.process2 scheme and might even have suggested it. So, I suspect that your
only hope of avoiding std.process2 is if you can come up with a better name.
- Jonathan M Davis
Why not just deprecate everything currently in std.process and drop in
the new stuff? It might be a bit ugly, but it prevents both code
breakage _and_ a proliferation of "std.module2"s.
My 2 cents,
NMS
