New std.uni: ready for more beating

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2013-02-25 19:21, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:

> What can I say Phobos is an example of software evolution ;)

Is the new std.uni completely backwards compatible with the old one. 
Otherwise we have the same problem as with std.process. But in this case 
we have another name that is actually better.

I'm having some problem understanding the obsession in shortening names, 
even when the full name isn't particular long.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg