std.uni vs std.unicode and beyond?

[deadalnix]

On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 01:24:42 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
> Doing it while keeping `std.uni` would create a duplication in 
> both API and implementation, since `std.unicode` will contain 
> all the functionality of `std.uni`. Eventually `std.uni` would 
> have to be removed, because if Phobos would keep the old 
> versions forever whenever a better version that does the same 
> thing comes it will become very cluttered. Java walked that way.
>
> Once the old `std.uni` will be finally removed - code will 
> break.

Yes, that is exactly what is needed. Today we only consider not 
breaking at all, or breaking it as of next version of DMD and 
without any support for what come before the breakage. This 
boolean choice mindset isn't helping.