GNU version 0.18

[Dave]

In article <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603281559270.5795 at bellevue.puremagic.com>, Brad
Roberts says...
>
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Dave wrote:
>
>> In article <mailman.15.1143256971.5269.d.gnu at puremagic.com>, Brad Roberts
>> says...
>> >
>> >platforms as porting work is done for them.  The phobos that comes with 
>> >gdc isn't stock phobos, there's a number of changes, primarily constrained 
>> >to the runtime support (exceptions, interfaces between the runtime and 
>> >compiler, etc).
>> >
>> 
>> Since you brought it up...
>> 
>> When are we going to be able to stop crapola like this?
>
>Well, I didn't start the trend, as I wasn't around then. :)
>

Sorry ;)

>> |version (GNU)
>> |  import std.c.unix.unix;
>> |else
>> |  import std.c.linux.linux;
>> 
>> <g>
>> 
>> POSIX to me really makes the most sense, but it seems to have the least
>> support.. Why?
>
>I'd vote for 'std.c.posix'.  I don't see why there's two levels there, 
>though I admit to not having searched for a justification.  The problem, 
>as you pointed out, is one of recognition.  Though I'd just point to 
>correctness over branding as a justification for using posix.  Given that 
>D is all about presenting a unified and consistent interface and that's 
>what posix is all about, it just seems right.
>
>That said, I hate to think of yet another source incompatible change like 
>this, but better now than before 1.0, which seems to be all the rage right 
>now.
>

Just to throw this out - I actually don't think this will be a big issue right
now with alot of source code because it's "just" the 'nix op. sys. independent
stuff, as opposed to renaming something like std.stdio. As I posted before, I'm
willing to do the legwork (unless I'm severly misunderestimating and run out of
time) if a decision is made one way or the other, but it has to be resolved.

I'd really like to know why the GDC folks made this decision in the first
place[*]. If they wanted to add stuff for things like OS X, AIX, etc. I really
think they should have lived within the original DMD framework and we'd all be
better off, even if 'linux' is not really the correct namespace.

[*] I still appreciate all the work on GDC of course.

>
>Later,
>Brad
>