Deterministic resource freeing - delete deprecation (again)

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:30:54 -0400, Alexander <aldem+dmars at nk7.net> wrote:

> On 27.04.2011 19:13, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>
>> clear is not a keyword, it is possible to name a member clear, and also  
>> have a clear global function.
>
>   Sure it is, though it is counter-intuitive - to use same name with  
> quite different meaning. As for me, if this will really be in final  
> spec, I'll always alias it to destroy().

That has been pointed out before.  Yes, it is considered a bad idea to do  
that, but we have no choice now, clear is the name.

I probably would consider changing the name of dcollections' function that  
empties all elements.  Clear is a very good name for that, but maybe it  
should be something else to avoid confusion.

>   BTW, could you please point me to "the ultimate authority"? I am  
> referring to your "The name choice is no longer up for debate.  It's  
> already set in print, and in the language." - so far, I was thinking  
> that DigitalMars website is the one, but your
> words make me wonder, if this is still true.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0321635361/ref=sib_dp_pt#reader-link

>   And, since there is a phrase: "It is not governed by a corporate  
> agenda or any overarching theory of programming. The needs and  
> contributions of the D programming community form the direction it  
> goes." I would like to know, how "the community" come
> to this choice, which is quite confusing, at least.

clear is Andrei's idea, he proposed it on the newsgroups.

Here was the first mention of it.

http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=97688

I'm not sure if anyone really debated the name until it was already part  
of the language, not much was said about the name in that thread.  I know  
many people have questioned the name of it after it was already in the  
language.  It may have caught some by surprise.

-Steve