On Monday, 15 July 2019 at 13:27:39 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
I asked for input from other developers before moving forward. They helped me understand that `rt` is where the core language features are implemented.
Assuming it was the discussion linked in this thread, it did not seem like the finer details which we covered today have been considered back then.
There are also two developers in this thread which are arguing the contrary, and it would be unfair to count only those participating in the prior discussion if you would make this a matter of numbers.
I submitted PRs that were scrutinized by the reviewers and merged.
Bad PRs get merged all the time. It happens. We need to recognize mistakes and do our best to address them.
The code that I moved into `rt/array` initially came from `rt`, depends on implementations in `rt` and is the core implementation of D's built-in arrays, so it is perfectly logical for it to be in `rt`.
That's a subjective assessment, and it would be perfectly fine to rely on subjective opinions to make decisions which would otherwise have no consequence, but it is not the case here. The decision was an avoidable breaking change.
I'm sorry you disagree and don't find my explanations convincing.
There are a few arguments remaining in this thread to which you have not responded.
