On 2014-02-26 07:58, Brian Schott wrote: > I think that's a bit backwards. I'd rather have > > std.d.lexer > std.d.ast > std.d.parser > > than > > std.lexer.d > std.parser.d > std.ast.d I agree with Brian. Although I would have a common package for all languages: std.language.d.lexer std.language.d.ast std.language.d.parser -- /Jacob Carlborg