'exp' vs 'std'? Forked: Vote for std.process

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 11:19:50 -0400, Timothee Cour  
<thelastmammoth at gmail.com> wrote:

> A)
> what has been described so far doesn't take into account revamped
> modules, only new modules. However revamping modules also needs to be
> taken into consideration (there was a discussion before on whether we
> should have std.process2, which was agreed to be bad).
>
> Here's a suggestion that would work for both new and revamped modules:
>
> put experimental/revamped modules during staging period under (to take
> std.process example):
>
> ./phobos/std/process.d //current one
> ./phobos/experimental/std/process.d //new one, still called module  
> std.process
>
> now instead of having to modify D source files to change 'import
> exp.process' into 'import std.process' as has been suggested by some,
> here we would only need to change compiler flags:
>
> rdmd $DFLAGS -I$phobos_root/experimental main.d  => uses
> experimental/std/process.d if import std.process is mentioned
>
> rdmd $DFLAGS main.d  => uses std/process.d if import std.process is  
> mentioned

How does that work if both modules are std.process?  Wouldn't there be a  
link error?

-Steve