Am 26.06.2011 03:29, schrieb Walter Bright: > On 6/25/2011 5:31 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >> So, while the majority have indicated in the past renaming functions >> in Phobos >> to be properly camelcased is worth breaking code in the general case, >> there is >> no such consensus in this particular case, so toStringz is sticking >> around. > > There's a large community using D that doesn't necessarily participate > in ng discussions. I'd like to see more than a simple majority in order > to rename existing functions (especially ones that have been around a > while). > > Breaking existing code really, really annoys people. It drives people > away from using D as "unstable" - and they'd be right. > > I don't think we can create a viable D community if we break existing > code every month without really, really good reasons to.
In the future the D community may be even larger - much larger hopefully. IMHO inconsistent naming in the standard lib makes D look unprofessional. If someone take a first look at the languages and it's standard lib and it looks like it's just cobbled together it may scare him off. I agree that there shouldn't be breaking changes /all the time/, but I'd really like to see *one* big breaking update that fixes all naming inconsistencies within Phobos. (Keeping deprecated aliases for the old names for some releases should make the transition easier.) Cheers, - Daniel
