"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.357.1331329638.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On Friday, March 09, 2012 16:36:27 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: >> On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 16:14:08 -0500, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote: >> > "Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message >> > news:jj6gjm$2m6a$1...@digitalmars.com... >> > >> >> But, I'm thinking this whole "dur vs duration" matter is stupid >> >> anyway. >> >> Seconds, hours, etc *are* durations. What the hell do we even need the >> >> "dur" or "duration" for anyway? >> >> >> >> I say fuck it: Let's just toss this into core.time (or std.datetime or >> >> whatever) and be done: >> >> >> >> alias dur!"years" years; >> >> alias dur!"months" months; >> >> alias dur!"weeks" weeks; >> >> alias dur!"days" days; >> >> alias dur!"hours" hours; >> >> alias dur!"minutes" minutes; >> >> alias dur!"seconds" seconds; >> >> alias dur!"msecs" msecs; >> >> alias dur!"usecs" usecs; >> >> alias dur!"hnsecs" hnsecs; >> >> >> >> And then we have the brevity issue solved (and in fact, improved over >> >> "dur"), so then "dur" can (and should) change to "duration" without >> >> screwing up brevity. And all probelms are optimally solved. As for the >> >> possibility of new name collisions: Honestly, in this case I see no >> >> reason >> >> to give a shit. >> > >> > https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/174 >> > >> > https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/485 >> > >> > https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/tools/pull/23 >> > >> > I completely understand the "secs==seconds" pull request being rejected >> > and >> > I think that's perfectly reasonable... >> > >> > But I'm going to be really pissed if this one's rejected out of some >> > misapplied, overly-puritanical obsession with "no aliases". >> >> You'll need to have dur aliased to duration to follow the normal >> deprecation procedure. >> >> I can't say I agree with this, as it pollutes the global namespace with >> several common terms that could be used for fields. > > Yeah. My general reaction is that this is a _bad_ idea. It creates aliases > and > uses names for free functions which are commonly used. We'll see if Walter > says > anything about this one, but my first reaction is to reject it. I'll wait > for > comments on it though. >
If that's the case, then this alias-phobia will have *truly* gotten completely out of hand.