std.container: fork in the road

[ixid via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 at 15:57:38 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
> On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 at 15:29:34 UTC, ixid wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 17 June 2015 at 14:57:40 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
>>> but std.collection isn't nearly so good a name.
>>>
>> std.container2 and so on?
>
> Dunno.  That's not something that really needs addressed right 
> now, is it?  Off-the-cuff, in an ideal world there would be 
> some way of easily knowing which API was intended and 
> forwarding to std.deprecated on an as-needed basis (with a 
> warning when it happens).  But "sanity" and "API versioning" 
> may exist at opposite ends of a spectrum, if I recall my 
> history.
>
> -Wyatt

What are the downsides? It would make it explicit what tutorials 
and programs were referring to in a very clear way, as well as 
abandon the pretense of a library being in stasis.