Can std.conv.toImpl please be deprecated

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, April 16, 2016 22:04:46 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 05:23:26PM +0000, Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d 
wrote:
> > Before I opened a PR, I wanted to get some second opinions.
> >
> > There is no reason IMO that the various overloads of toImpl should be
> > public. Having the internal functionality of a parent function, in
> > this case to, be exposed like this causes:
> >
> > 1. The docs to be cluttered with useless info. Anything pertinent can
> > be moved to the to docs.
> > 2. The function cannot be refactored because its guts are shown to the
> > world
> >
> > Also, there is no reason that anyone should use toImpl over to. So can
> > I please mark toImpl as deprecated in order to clean up std.conv?
>
> I'm pretty sure that toImpl being public is an oversight. The name
> itself implies that it should be private.  I seriously doubt any user
> code actually calls toImpl directly... shouldn't it be just a matter of
> marking it private instead?  Do we really need to go through a
> deprecation cycle for this?

toImpl has the documentation for all of the specific conversions. So, you
can't make it private or that documentation would go away.

- Jonathan M Davis