Alexander Stepanov notes on programming online (ot: tango)

[Lutger]

John Reimer wrote:
> I just wanted to clear something up here concerning the use of the term
> "standard":
> 
> Tango is certainly intended to be "standard" capable, but by no means has
> any claims to being a standard unless someone like Walter makes it so
> or people implicitly adopt it as such (in this case, that's still not
> /really/ standard other than in use). It's really counterproductive to
> pretend a library is going to be a standard just because it exhists: I
> think there can only be one standard for D (or else "standard" really
> becomes a meaningless term if there are multiples of them) and that spot
> isn't something with which to trifle. So, Tango is merely an
> excellent alternative. I'm biased to think it rather as the better of the
> two for various reasons. :) But having a choice is good for people.  And I
> think that that is precisely what Tango is trying to express: people
> should be given "choice". :)

Tango is still different from other libraries in the sense that it is
incompatible with Phobos, and as such is 'a standard' library if that makes
sense, an alternative as you said.
 
> Tango definitely tries to be what Phobos can not or will not be.
> Tango is designed to be community driven -- hightly responsive to bug
> reports, suggestions, critiques, and contributions; well documented, well
> maintained.  The development model is different than phobos' and really
> not comparable; the designs also are noticeably different, Tango's being
> noticeably more object-oriented than procedural.  In addtion, Tango is
> /painstakingly/ designed for reliability, performance, and small binary
> size (I've seen the developers at work at this process and the amount of
> energy they put into finding solutions for these issues is
> absolutely incredible).

I agree, from what I've seen it is very impressive work, with an attention
to detail. You say choice is good, but one thing I'm worried about is that
there will be two 'standard libraries', and what this will mean. Some
libraries will support Tango, some Phobos, some both. I'm not sure this is
a situation that will be good for D in the long run? (For now it might be
fine though, it gives Tango a chance to prove itself).

Personally I think Tango has a much better chance and imho it would be best
if this is adopted as *the* standard library eventually, if only for the
reason there are so many programmers involved.