A common D standard library

[Brad Anderson]

Dejan Lekic wrote:
> I can only speak in my name - I will not use any "standard" D library other
> than Phobos, and my own libraries. Phobos is open-source, Mr. Bright is
> very much open person, and he will incorporate any sane change into Phobos.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here.  Not on your choice of lib, but
on Walter's commitment to Phobos.  He has repeatedly said that his focus is on
the language spec and the DMD reference compiler, and always seeks
contributions / prods the guys who are active for the library content.  So,
while the D Language shines and the spec is solving all the C++ issues as
noted in another recent post, Phobos, well, is part of D's overall
lack-of-libraries issue.  It is interesting to note how good Phobos is, given
its place in W's priority list - probably just another testament to his skill.

Scaling D, however, will take more than just Walter, and I don't think I'd get
a lot of disagreement.  There are insane amounts of great code in Ares and
Mango which go largely unused because we haven't had the stampede yet.  These
libs speak to the skill of Sean & Kris, and all the testers/documenters
they've had hanging around their libs.  The fact that they're actively
developing those libs should be encouraging to all of us, as the chief
complaint I hear in the NG is lack of libs.

Surely Walter doing compiler/spec things and Sean/Kris doing lib dev, Derek
cranking out a new Build, {insert name here} working on a new version of
{insert project here} is better than a one-man show?  And if a new lib ever
comes around that is better/more complete than Phobos, won't you be compelled
to take it for a spin?

BA