std.uni vs std.unicode and beyond?

Brad Anderson eco at gnuk.net
Tue May 21 13:32:00 PDT 2013


On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 20:12:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> I'm completely against renaming it. It will break code for 
> little benefit. And
> given that std.uni is actually one of the modules that you're 
> _likely_ to have
> to give the full path to (in particular because std.ascii has 
> many of the same
> functions but for ASCII), making it longer would be annoying. 
> Maybe
> std.unicode would be okay if we were creating a brand new 
> module, but std.uni
> already exists. Let's just leave it as-is.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Would the public import people are suggesting not work for 
maintaining backward compatibility?

Also, couldn't you just do import uni = std.unicode to save on 
typing in modules that make use of both std.ascii and std.unicode 
(that's even less typing than the current requirement to type the 
fully qualified name which includes std)?


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list