Path as an object in std.path

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Thursday, June 06, 2013 11:09:29 Walter Bright wrote:
> On 6/6/2013 10:50 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > Some modules have needed been redone. Some still do. But we already _did_
> > rework std.path. We agreed that we liked the new API, and it's been
> > working
> > great. It's one thing to revisit an API that's been around since before we
> > had ranges or a review process. It's an entirely different thing to be
> > constantly reworking entire modules. I think that we need _very_ strong
> > justification to redesign a module that we already put through the review
> > process. And I really don't think that we have it here.
> 
> I think we're in violent agreement.

Yes. I was replying in support of your argument rather than replying directly 
to Dylan.

> An example of a strong justification for a redo is, for example, conversion
> to use ranges. std.zip needs that treatment.

Agreed.

- Jonathan M Davis