Tango - shallower hierarchy (was: Phango - questions)

[Anders Bergh]

On Nov 27, 2007 2:50 AM, Marcin Kuszczak
<aarti_please_no at spam_interia.pl> wrote:
> Some more thoughts:
>
> tango.core
I think this one is OK, as Sean explained in an earlier post about how
tango.core is like java.lang...
>
> tango.io
> - looks quite good for me. IO is coherent concept in tango, so that's why
> there is so many different modules over there. But I would consider to
> extract modules connected with files to another separate package.
Agreed.

> tango.math
> - looks ok.
Agreed.

> tango.net
> - putting cluster here I think is not best thing IMHO. Clustering seems to
> be quite a different beast from http/ftp/smtp etc. Writing application for
> http doesn't mean that I will need clusters. I understand that many
> clusters just need network to work, but is it always true? I think that
> there are cluster implementations which doesn't work in 'standard'
> networks. I think that whole cluster package should be putted on main tango
> level. BTW it will be good marketing for Tango - support for clusters in
> standard library is really intriguing. What does mean tina in cluster
> package? It is completely meaningless for newcomers - maybe some better
> name would be more suitable?
I agree completely - plus the cluster module hierarchy is really big...

> tango.stdc
> - ok
Agreed.

> tango.sys
> - ok
Agreed.

> tango.text
> - mostly ok; I would be happy to see all conversion modules in one package;
Yep, I agree with you here too...

> tango.util
> - comments in my previous post
Yeah.

> --
> Regards
> Marcin Kuszczak (Aarti_pl)
> -------------------------------------
> Ask me why I believe in Jesus - http://zapytaj.dlajezusa.pl (en/pl)
> Doost (port of few Boost libraries) - http://www.dsource.org/projects/doost/
> -------------------------------------
>
>

Anders