hap.random: a new random number library for D

[Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 6/19/2014 5:27 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
>
> I realized that it ought to be possible to allow a more direct drop-in
> replacement for std.random by adding static opCalls to the classes which
> were previously structs.
>
> Thoughts on this, in favour, against ... ?

I'm on the fence:

Pro: Upgrade paths and backwards compatibility are great, especially for 
Phobos.

Con: If any semantics are changed (default ref/value passing is the only 
one that comes to mind), then maybe it would mask potential upgrade 
issues. Breakage would force users to notice the change and (hopefully) 
deal with it appropriately.

I don't personally see it as a big deal either way, though.