Is package.d a good idea?

[12345swordy]

On Sunday, 1 July 2018 at 21:40:05 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
> On Sunday, 1 July 2018 at 18:03:41 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Sunday, 1 July 2018 at 14:23:36 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
>>> I was suggesting we do what Rust did. i.e. 'import foo', 
>>> imports foo.d, which can in turn do 'import foo.bar', which 
>>> will import foo/bar.d.
>>
>> Yeah, that's the way it should have been done in the first 
>> place. Nowhere else in D does it require a specific filename 
>> except package.d - it is a pointless inconsistency anyway.
>
> Now we just need to wait for someone to write the DIP....

There nothing prevent you from writing one, is there?

-Alexander Heistermann