I was thinking some idle thoughts this afternoon, and I thought that the nicest name for the d standard library might be "core" instead of "d" or "D".

So, we'd have this:

import core.string;
import core.zip;

...instead of this:

import d.string;
import d.zip;

I think it's much nicer.

Benji Smith wrote:
> I was thinking some idle thoughts this afternoon, and I thought that
> the nicest name for the d standard library might be "core" instead of
> "d" or "D".
> 
> So, we'd have this:
> 
> import core.string;
> import core.zip;
> 
> ...instead of this:
> 
> import d.string;
> import d.zip;
> 
> I think it's much nicer.

Good idea.

I like "core".  I still like "dlib" a lot, but "core" is much more desirable than "d" or "D".


5 Reasons Why "core" Is A Good Name for the D Standard Library
--------------------------------------------------------------

1) Clear:  Easy to remember because it's a self-explaining name.

2) Concise:  It's brief (but it's not abbreviated).

3) Convention:  Uncontroversially keeps with the lowercase-only module naming convention.

4) Unique:  A four letter word is less likely to already appear in code than a single letter.

5) Permanent:  No need to change if Walter reverts D's name back to Mars. ;)


JC
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

"J C Calvarese" <jcc7@cox.net> wrote in message news:bnmuc8$19a8$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> if Walter reverts D's name back to Mars. ;)

Not bloody likely <g>.