Phobos addition formal review: std.experimental.allocator

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 6/23/15 9:53 AM, extrawurst wrote:
> On Tuesday, 23 June 2015 at 16:49:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 6/23/15 9:48 AM, extrawurst wrote:
>>> I agree with Adam on this: "Just a quick concern, I don't think a
>>> package.d should ever have anything except imports in it"
>>> (see http://forum.dlang.org/post/qwatonmpnoyjsvzjpyjl@forum.dlang.org)
>>
>> What is the rationale? -- Andrei
>
> I simply quote his following post in the mentioned thread:
>
> "The biggest benefit of breaking up the big modules is so you can access
> some of it without requiring all of it. But when the part you want is in
> the package.d, you can't get it independently anymore; importing that
> also imports everything else, negating the reason it was split up in the
> first place."

But that doesn't apply to packages that do NOT originate as big modules, 
so they have no backward compatibility issue. This is the case for 
std.allocator. I see a net pessimization for everyone involved to change 
the current packaging.

All I'm saying is we shouldn't take it noncritically that packages 
should be done one particular way.


Andrei