On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 17:31:59 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 5/21/13 1:27 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Then we can correctly judge whether the name change is worth
doing. I
don't know that it is. std.uni is not immediately recognizable
as
something else, so it warrants a lookup in the docs. Yes, less
obvious,
but not horrifically misnamed. I don't think it's worth the
effort to
rename at this point unless it's shown that nearly nobody uses
it.
I agree. I'd personally love it if std.unicode replaced
std.uni, but at this point the rename is insufficiently
motivated. It's not like people go, "hmmm I need some Unicode
stuff, let me see if std.unicode is there. No? The hell with
it, I'm moving to another language."
Andrei
The problem is that people that need Unicode stuff see `std.utf`
and assume that all Unicode related stuff are there.
