D2 port of Tango

[Charles Hixson]

On 11/05/2011 10:56 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:50:09 +0000, zsxxsz wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't like Phobos design, which takes all libs in the same path
>> looking so urgly, but tango seperate libs in different path according to
>> its function using,
>> so I like tango's design.
>
> You will never satisfy both worlds (simplicity vs flexibility). Both
> Phobos and Tango have their place in the D community. It is unfortunate
> many people in the D community fails to see it. Also, it is unfortunate
> (but very easy to explain) that Tango project started as a complete
> implementation of the run-time library. We debate this for years on irc://
> irc.freenode.org/d and it never ends. I belong to the group that like the
> way Phobos does things, but unlike some people I think Tango is a
> brilliant, high-level library. I wish we had druntime when Tango project
> started, but nothing is lost, I believe Tango2 project will fit nicely on
> top of druntime, and live long and prosperous life.
>
> The reason why I also like Tango (even though I never used it in anything
> serious) is that it reminds me a lot of Java API which is robust, reach
> and intuitive. Tango IO is very similar to Java NIO...

If Tango is compatible with Phobos, then I don't mind it.  I'm not real 
tight on either disk space or RAM.  The prior version, however, required 
that Phobos be removed to install, so you could either use Tango 
libraries *OR* Phobos libraries.  And Tango was often broken, where 
Phobos usually worked.  This divided the community, and gifted us with 
REAMS of non-usable projects.

So I'm just a bit skittish when I hear the name "Tango" these days. 
(Perhaps it worked better on MSWind platforms.  But it still divided a 
community that was already smaller than optimal.)