New names - 2.068 roundup

[Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 21:06:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 6/25/2015 12:48 PM, Mathias Lang via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> And he's right. It is really annoying to update to a new 
>> version and have
>> perfectly valid and working code breaking because someone had 
>> a nice idea.
>> Ideally, we should only ever break code that has a bug in it.
>
> I've also been willing to break code if it involves significant 
> performance, usability, or correctness improvements. Renaming, 
> though, doesn't provide that.

For the record, the goal of the breakage in this case is not 
renaming a function, but avoiding the need to introduce a 
newly-named alternative function in the first place.