std.allocator: nomenclature needed

[Brian Schott via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 19 May 2015 at 05:17:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
>> Would it be better to move the porcelain code into package.d 
>> so the
>> nomenclature simply becomes `import std.allocator;`?
>
> Probably a good thing to do. -- Andrei

I've been thinking about this as well and couldn't think of a 
better name either. For what it's worth I agree with placing them 
in std.allocator.