On Monday, 30 May 2016 at 21:39:14 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Monday, 30 May 2016 at 16:34:49 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
On Monday, 30 May 2016 at 16:25:20 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
D1 -> D2 was a vastly more disruptive change than getting rid
of auto-decoding would be.
Don't be so sure. All string handling code would become
broken, even if it appears to work at first.
Assuming silent breakage is on the table, what would be broken,
really?
Code that must intentionally count or otherwise operate code
points, sure. But how much of all string handling code is like
that?
Perhaps it would be worth trying to silently remove
autodecoding and seeing how much of Phobos breaks, as an
experiment. Has this been tried before?
(Not saying this is a route we should take, but it doesn't seem
to me that it will break "all string handling code" either.)
132 lines in Phobos use auto-decoding - that should be fixable ;-)
See them: http://sprunge.us/hUCL
More details: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/4384
