[Issue 19665] Package modules are meaningless

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19665 --- Comment #5 from Vladimir Panteleev --- (In reply to Adam D. Ruppe from comment #4) > It does bug me that it is inconsistent with other modules though: in no > other case does the filename matter (aside from automatic lookups). You are > allowed

[Issue 19665] Package modules are meaningless

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19665 Adam D. Ruppe changed: What|Removed |Added CC||destructiona...@gmail.com --- Comment #4

[Issue 19665] Package modules are meaningless

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19665 Vladimir Panteleev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 19665] Package modules are meaningless

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19665 --- Comment #2 from Victor Porton --- Deprecating, not invalidating. > What's the advantage of > > > foo.d > foo/a.d > > Over > > foo/package.d > foo/a.d The advantage is cleaner idea that it is package foo (and also decreasing the number of

[Issue 19665] Package modules are meaningless

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19665 Seb changed: What|Removed |Added CC||greeen...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Seb --- I'm