On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 06:32:59PM +0100, Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > On Thursday, 21 March 2013 at 16:37:38 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:08:00PM +0100, Vladimir Panteleev > >wrote: > >>Since (IIRC) all issues regarding incompatibility with std.process > >>have been resolved, how about renaming the module to std.process? > >>This way it'll also be easier to test backwards-compatibility in > >>existing programs. > > > >+1. I hate std.process2 with a passion. Let's keep it as > >std.process. > > The main reason I created a separate std.process2 was in fact not > that I intended to keep it that way, but because I kept getting > merge conflicts whenever I merged in Phobos master. > > If you all don't mind, I'd like to keep it separate until we are > satisfied that the API is stable. [...]
That's fine, as long as it's renamed to std.process once it's merged. T -- People say I'm indecisive, but I'm not sure about that. -- YHL, CONLANG