Uri class and parser

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2012-10-26 11:13, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> There's definitely some truth to that, but Walter in particular seems to be
> against breaking anything period. If it were entirely up to him, pretty much
> none of the breaking changes that have happened to Phobos' API over the last
> few years would have happened. And Andrei is beginning to oppose most breaking
> changes. So, the bar is getting pretty high for making breaking changes.
> Simply renaming stuff generally isn't going to cut it. This is arguably
> slightly more than simply renaming std.uri, because it's an issue of module
> organization rather than simply what its name is, but it's also arguably so
> trivial that the benefit is near zero.

I agree that's not good to break code. But I also don't like that we 
have to "suffer" for the choices/mistakes made in the past just because 
of risking breaking code.

Example, someone thought it was a "great" idea to basically not not use 
the nice module system we do have in D and instead use a flat namespace.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg