core.stdcpp

[Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d-announce]

"eles"  wrote in message news:ybcxmuwwpsiyupwerzsa at forum.dlang.org...

> The question of dupplication may be addressed now better, since the newly 
> fixed bug about hierarchical packaging.

I don't see how.

> _only that_ should be the runtime. And the sole part that one needs to 
> port in order to claim having a full port of the D language (that is, the 
> compiler). These are the tires of the cars, the things that touch the 
> ground. Everything else is optional. (Pirelli had a nice advertisemnt with 
> this line)

Well, I agree it absolutely has to be in druntime.

> And, to go further, only c/OS bindings required for this are to be 
> embedded at this level.

Requiring full c/OS bindings in druntime is so useful, and it costs us so 
little.  Besides a warm fuzzy feeling, not requiring them seems to only 
benefit D implementations for theoretical platforms that probably don't 
exist.

> Phobos shall be 100% optional, otherwise you don't have a language, but a 
> framework. This is the separation line: the runtime is a must for the 
> language, the standard library is not. If in doubt wether one piece 
> belongs, cut here.

Call it what you want.  Phobos is supposed to be 100% optional but it 
currently is not.

We get to decide where the line goes, and with D it is almost always decided 
on usefulness, not correctness.  Requiring c bindings is useful.