On 6/25/15 3:57 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 19:55:41 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Yeah, I agree for existing names, but these are unreleased new names.
I thought the idea was to use this trick to avoid introducing the new
names, and instead change the established names in a
mostly-backwards-compatible way.
Yeah, that is the idea. There should be no code breakage, or it won't
fly. I took the "no clever schemes and no overengineering" as a
rejection of this idea, only renaming is on the table.
-Steve
