RFC: std.*.concept convention

[Brad Anderson via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 11 February 2015 at 08:00:54 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Putting the complexity of the container concept aside; I think 
> we should factor out the concept checkers from 
> std.range.primitives and put them in std.range.concept and 
> establish a convention of using modules named std.*.concept for 
> concept checkers in the future. The consistency gained by such 
> a convention makes type concepts easier to understand and 
> commonly used module names easier to remember. If we do it now, 
> there is no breakage, as the splitting of std.range has not yet 
> been released: hence the otherwise clumsy timing of this 
> suggestion.
>
> [snip]

+1. Makes a lot of sense to do it this way.

I prefer "concept" over "trait". I think of traits as more 
primitive building blocks. With a trait you are querying 
information about a type. With a concept you are fitting a type 
to its requirements.