Standalone AA implementation ready for review (Was: Re: Replacing AA's in druntime)

[foobar]

On Thursday, 15 March 2012 at 10:39:04 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:19:33 -0400, Jacob Carlborg
>>
>> I think object.d should be empty except for the definition of 
>> Object. The rest should be located in their own modules and 
>> publicly imported in object.d
>
> I think the compiler would have to change for that to happen.
>
> I would support such a change, but then again, it seems like 
> we'd get little measurable benefit for it, making it difficult 
> to get through Walter.
>
> -Steve

Why would that pose a problem to DMD? object.d is a regular D 
module and D provides a public import feature. If that fails for 
some modules it should be considered a bug in the compiler.

I disagree about the side of the benefit. This gains us 
readability of code which is IMO a MAJOR benefit. It's not just 
the object.d module but a lot of phobos too.
It frustrates me to no end Andrei's refusal to accept a design 
proven to work for half a century (which is already utilized by 
the compiler!) - the File System. Choosing instead to duplicate 
organization features inside DDOC as sections. This is a classic 
example of a code smell.