Can std.conv.toImpl please be deprecated

[Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 17 April 2016 at 11:00:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> What do you propose that we do instead? We need all of the 
> separate toImpl functions regardless of the name. Do you want 
> to try and embed them all inside of std.conv.to with the name 
> to? I expect that it's feasible, but it would royally suck from 
> the standpoint of unit tests, since then either

If we do as H. S. Teoh is suggesting and go straight to marking 
as private, then there is no reason to.