questions on PhanTango 'merger' - long-term vision

[BCS]

Yigal Chripun wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> 
>> So in my view, any kind of merger is first (and possibly only) about 
>> runtime
>> compatibility. If one is to merge everything in some way, it may, for
>> mantainance reasons (less core functionality to mantain, but a lot of 
>> work
>> to do the initial wrap), make sense to build one of the API's on top 
>> of the
>> other. Building for instance Tango IO on top of Phobos don't make sense
>> though (at least to me), as it would degrade performance. Doing the
>> opposite, would probably create other subtle differences due to 
>> Phobos' IO
>> going via the C runtime. 
>> Lars Ivar Igesund
>> blog at http://larsivi.net
>> DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
>> Dancing the Tango
> 
> 
> A question: is it a good thing that Phobos depends on the c runtime? I'm 
> not sure but won't it be better if the future merged D standard library 
> wouldn't need the c runtime at all? (less dependencies and maybe better 
> performance?)

at a bare minimum, you will need the OS system call API. That (on most 
systems) is C. You can't completely divorce your self from C and there 
is a lot of good low level "paint on the metal" C code out there. D is 
not going to do better than that stuff so why not just use it.