"Phango" container classes

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

Regan Heath wrote:

> Janice Caron wrote:
>> On 10/2/07, Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar at igesund.net> wrote:
>>> As it is, I
>>> would expect most (if not all) to want Tango's runtime ahead of Phobos'
>>> given compatible interfaces.
>> 
>> Well certainly not "all", because "all" includes me.
>> 
>> You have to realise, a lot of people, myself included, adopt the
>> philosophy "If an engine ain't broke, don't fix it". If there is /no
>> need/ to replace the runtime (which there isn't), then I'm not going
>> to do it, because what I have right now works just fine, so I'm not
>> going to risk breaking anything by changing it.
>> 
>> On the other hand, I'd have no problems with just importing a module
>> to get me lots of cool new classes.
> 
> Sometimes "broken" is difficult to define.
> 
> I have the impression (perhaps mistaken) that the main point of
> difference between the phobos and tango runtime is that tango's is
> better organised, has less coupling, and allows for more advanced
> features to be built upon it (some of which are already present in Tango).

You are not directly mistaken, but the above point has resulted in a runtime
that is easier to mantain, easier to fix bugs in and has thus become
something of higher quality. There are also a few features not in the
Phobos runtime.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango