phobos / tango / ares

Bill Baxter dnewsgroup at
Wed Feb 7 20:36:32 PST 2007

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>>> Frits van Bommel wrote:
>>>> Which one to use is hard to say at this point. I've been trying out
>>>> Tango since its release and I like it but I sometimes miss some 
>>>> parts of
>>>> Phobos. Whether this is because Phobos is just more familiar to me or
>>>> actually better is hard to say...
>>> Note that what you miss that you feel you have in Phobos, is very 
>>> much part
>>> of the feedback we would like.
>> I'm having trouble understanding first why Tango had to be made 
>> mutually exclusive to Phobos (is it just changes to object.d? were 
>> those really necessary?)
> The Tango runtime code contains quite a few differences compared to 
> Phobos, but the bulk of these are hidden from the user.  Some of the 
> more visible differences are that Error has been dropped, Exception 
> reworked, Object.toString() changed to Object.toUtf8(), and the Thread 
> object has a slightly different interface.  During development, both in 
> Ares/Mango and now in Tango, no effort was made to either deliberately 
> mimic or to differ from Phobos.  Rather, a design was chosen that simply 
> made the most sense.  That said, a great deal of effort has been made to 
> avoid changing anything that feels like a language feature, and it was 
> sometimes difficult to determine where the line should be drawn.  The 
> Object.toString() issue sits pretty squarely on that line, and a great 
> deal of discussion took place before that particular change was agreed 
> upon.
>  > and if object.d differences are the only reason, then I
>> still don't really get why most Phobos code can't still be imported as 
>> is or with trivial changes.  For example, phobos' std.path doesn't 
>> seem to have any direct dependencies on the gc API or on a particular 
>> version of object.d.  What's the issue?
> Most Phobos code can be imported as is or with trivial changes, it's 
> simply a matter of taking the time to do so.  Frank actually did this a 
> while back for his own use, and the project now lives on dsource as 
> tango.phobos.  I am sure it could do with some dedicated maintainers -- 
> developing one library is quite enough for me :-)

Ok.  Thanks for the explanation.
There were some comments before about "porting phobos to tango" that 
just made it sound like a bigger job that it apparently is in fact.

As many people have noticed, phobos doesn't really change very quickly 
<g> so I suspect it wouldn't be too much work to maintain compatibility 
once achieved.  Patches seem like a good way to go.  If you have a patch 
against phobos then applying it to new versions of phobos would likely 
just work, since the changes to phobos are few.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list