On Wednesday, 4 November 2015 at 22:42:19 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
And why break the code that uses them? They work just fine, and
for many programs, the allocation is a non-issue and simply
getting a string back rather than a range is more user-friendly.
Because there are two functions that do the exact same thing that
both need to be maintained. The fix for an existing code base is
as simple as a global find and replace for the function name and
change the type to auto.
And it's not like we're ever going to remove all of the
GC-allocating stuff from Phobos anyway.
We can remove as much as possible.
And if we have an eager function that allocates and a lazy one
which doesn't, we've provided the @nogc option for that
functionality already.
Again, I fail to see why you would ever need to use the
allocating versions of these functions when the non-allocating
versions perform the exact same tasks but faster.
