On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 12:51:05 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
The pitch by deadalnix:
I strongly push into renaming it to std.unicode . As said in
the other thread : uni can be unicode, but also unique, union,
unit, uniform, unix, unijambist, whatever.
When theses pile up in a large library, this is more and more
difficult to rely on intuition/autocompletion and much more on
programmer's memory. It mean that it takes longer to learn the
whole library.
My reservations:
If the chief benefit of renaming is aesthetics then I'd rather
pass.
This kind of knee-jerk changes made on basis of "a good time to
try to push a better name" just don't belong in design of
library/package structure. Yeah, I know nobody is going to say
"package structure" looking at Phobos.
If we make it a part of restructuring std.* that is long
overdue then I'm fine as long as package structure is well
thought out as a whole. Changing it now before adopting a
package structure risks the 2nd change and another set of
arguments for keeping things as is.
Let's continue discussion here and not in voting thread.
I vote to rename it. It's hard to find for people new to phobos
under the name "uni" (anecdotally, it took me awhile to find it
when I was starting out and occasionally someone hops in IRC and
asks about unicode and you typically have to point out to them
that the unicode module is std.uni) I've never seen unicode
called "uni" outside of std.uni.
