[phobos] Why ConvError and not ConvException?

[Sean Kelly]

On Nov 16, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 16, 2010 14:45:39 Shin Fujishiro wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Yeah, I agree that suffixed Exceptions are very clear.  I wrote it
>> because std.concurrency has non-suffixed exceptions such as
>> MessageMismatch, which are still clear thanks to negative terms
>> embedded in their names.
> 
> Well, then I'd argue that those exception classes should have their names 
> changed to include Exception, but the negative terms embedded in their names do 
> make them work as they are. It's just inconsistent, and generally-speaking, such 
> inconsistencies in a library should be avoided unless there's a good, overriding 
> reason to have them.

 Changing the name would create an inconsistency with TDPL.