On Monday, 16 January 2017 at 19:45:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I can see that as an argument not to add something that it's in std.traits to __traits or why something should be added to std.traits rather than __traits, but if something already exists with __traits, why duplicate that logic in std.traits? It seems like it complicates std.traits for no benefit as well as risking having the behavior of  __traits and std.traits differ, which could cause confusion and bugs.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Why? Because working with introspection in D requires constantly switching between at least 4 different documentation pages to find the introspection you're interested in.

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 11:17:10 QAston via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 16 January 2017 at 19:45:33 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > I can see that as an argument not to add something that it's in std.traits to __traits or why something should be added to std.traits rather than __traits, but if something already exists with __traits, why duplicate that logic in std.traits? It seems like it complicates std.traits for no benefit as well as risking having the behavior of  __traits and std.traits differ, which could cause confusion and bugs.
> >
> > - Jonathan M Davis
>
> Why? Because working with introspection in D requires constantly switching between at least 4 different documentation pages to find the introspection you're interested in.

That's completely unaffected by whether a trait in std.traits uses something from __traits or whether it implements it on its own. It is affected by whether something is in __traits or std.traits, but that's not the question here. What Nordlow is looking to do is make existing traits in std.traits use the corresponding __traits where they already exist rather than having a separate implementation. It's entirely an implementation detail.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Monday, 16 January 2017 at 11:20:16 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
> That's exactly my plan.

Plan:

https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5038

Feedsback, please.

On Tuesday, 17 January 2017 at 18:22:06 UTC, Nordlöw wrote:
> https://github.com/dlang/phobos/pull/5038

This makes (at least) UnsignedTypeOf unused in Phobos, and it's undocumented but public. There are LREFs in the std.traits docs under the SomethingTypeOf section - none of these links go anywhere AFAICT. Presumably the links should be removed from the docs (independently of the above pull), but should unused undocumented public templates also be removed?