Module Clarification

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On 9/22/16 10:29 AM, Jonathan Marler wrote:

> If the package.d file didn't exist, then I don't think there would be
> any problem with hierarchical modules.  Is this the right conclusion?
> Was package.d a mistake?  Maybe the reasoning is that D doesn't really
> like hierarchical modules, so creating them should look a bit odd?

Before package.d support, you could not do any importing of packages. 
You could only import modules. package.d was how the compiler allowed 
importing packages.

I don't know that there is a fundamental difference between 
foo/package.d and foo.d, but this is just the solution that was chosen. 
Is it a mistake? I don't think so, it's just a preference.

Prior to this, it was common to put "package" imports into an "all.d" file:

foo/all.d // import fooPart1.d fooPart2.d
foo/fooPart1.d

-Steve