Deprecated Library Functions / Methods

[deed]

On Sunday, 2 December 2012 at 19:06:22 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Sunday, December 02, 2012 14:19:18 deed wrote:
>> Why not let all breaking improvements go to a clear cut std2 
>> and
>> let std be improved only with extensions and bug fixes? When 
>> std2
>> is ready enough, let the same happen and breaking code goes to
>> std3.
>> 
>> Then you get std.xml and std2.xml, which are different and a
>> probable source of confusion. On the other hand, the modules in
>> the standard library do not exist independently, they are part 
>> of
>> a unified design and layout. So it may be more valuable to know
>> that std3.algorithm, std3.range, std3.container, etc. work
>> together out of the box, rather than to know whether
>> std.algorithm2 and std.range3 are compatible.

>
> Duplicating the entire standard library is overkill. Ideally, 
> we wouldn't need
> to keep making breaking changes to it. You get it right, and 
> then you leave it
> as-is. The main problem is that Phobos has been being written 
> as the language
> has been evolving..

It may introduce more administrative work, but should solve most 
problems in both camps.