core.stdcpp

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 8/26/2014 8:30 AM, Mike wrote:
> If core.stdcpp is intended to be the language bindings to libstdc++, I don't
> think it should belong it D's language implementation, druntime, any more the
> language bindings to Cairo or GTK should.
>
> The same goes for core.stdc and core.sys.linux and friends, as these are not
> part of D's language implementation.

Regardless of where stdcpp goes, one issue is that the stuff in it goes into the 
namespace "std", which conflicts with Phobos' "std" higher level package name. 
So it has to be in a separate hierarchy.

There's never going to be a clear distinction between druntime and phobos. The 
original reason for the split anyway was that druntime would be a common core 
between Tango and Phobos. That reason has faded away.

I suggested core.stdcpp because given the existence of core.stdc, it's where 
people will expect to find it.