New std.uni: ready for more beating

[Dmitry Olshansky]

26-Feb-2013 11:20, Jacob Carlborg пишет:
> 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.
>

It is backwards compatible and was created to be a drop in replacement 
as one of its requirements. In any case the API of std.uni is small and 
simple enough to keep it as is.

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

Let's not go there. And uni is not obsession at all. POSIX 'O_CREAT' is.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky