Formal Review of std.process

[Lars T. Kyllingstad]

On Thursday, 4 April 2013 at 17:04:53 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 12:50:01 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic 
> <andrej.mitrovich at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/4/13, Jesse Phillips <Jesse.K.Phillips+D at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Source:
>>> https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/blob/std-process2/std/process2.d
>>
>> Dead link.
>
> https://github.com/kyllingstad/phobos/blob/std-process2/std/process.d
>
> At the last minute I insisted we change std.process2 to 
> std.process since it was agreed to incorporate the original API 
> instead of redesigning it slightly.

There was a recent thread [1] about deepening Phobos' module 
hierarchy, and it seems that most people agree this is something 
that should eventually happen.

In light of this, here's a suggestion:  How about we, rather than 
updating the old std.process, create a new module called 
std.sys.process?  Or even better, IMO, std.sys.environment and 
std.sys.pipe as well as std.sys.process?

This would also allow us to give developers an earlier heads-up 
that the old std.process is going the way of the dodo, by using a 
pragma(msg) in the module.  (The functions in std.process are not 
templated, so we can't do the nice trick of putting the 
pragma(msg) inside the functions themselves.)

Lars

[1] 
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ugmacrokqghrrwpfovam@forum.dlang.org