On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 17:42:36 Kagamin wrote: > On Tuesday, 29 October 2013 at 20:25:16 UTC, Lars T. Kyllingstad > > wrote: > > Therefore, I would like to suggest a compromise: I propose we > > move the functions into an std.posix.process module. (There is > > currently no std.posix package, but we do have std.windows, so > > I don't see why we can't add it.) > > I think, a more appropriate name is std.native > (std.native.process etc). This package would strive to be > platform-specific for the sake of efficiency rather than > cross-platform. If someone doesn't need to be cross-platform, he > needs an efficient interface to the native efficient capabilities > of the current platform. That said, the content of std.native > modules will be platform-specific and will provide comprehensive > D-ified API for the platform features.
Then you have to worry about which functions in a module work on which OS. It's generally a far cleaner separation to separate the OSes via the module system, which is what druntime does for posix and windows. - Jonathan M Davis