questions on PhanTango 'merger' - long-term vision

Kris foo at bar.com
Thu Oct 11 10:01:41 PDT 2007


Yes, thank you!

This is a really important point because, supposing the Runtime was 
compatible, Peter still would likely not be able to do what he wants 
(because the I/O would still be different, for example). His point is 
exactly why we're trying to get a handle on what people want/expect.

- Kris


"Peter C. Chapin" <pchapin at sover.net> wrote in message 
news:fel1gp$v1j$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Kris wrote:
>
>> A number of people feel that something (perhaps
>> intangible?) is missing and we're trying to get a handle on that, while 
>> at
>> the same time trying to figure out what people really expect from a
>> phantango merger.
>
> The main issue from my point of view is compatibility. Right now, as I
> understand it, if I build a D library on top of Phobos or Tango I
> exclude users of the other run time system from using my library. This
> state of affairs in THE pain point. You don't have this situation in any
> other well established language (that I know of), and it greatly
> inhibits my inclination toward building D libraries.
>
> I actually don't care about features, style, or documentation because I
> shouldn't have to care. I should be able to use a single interface to a
> run time system and know that my work can be used by "anyone" else
> (barring special purpose configurations).
>
> For example, if I write a library in C++ I can use the facilities
> described by the C++ standard and know that everyone else will have
> those facilities available. If I need a third party library X, I can
> document that dependency and reasonably ask my users to also provide X
> without disrupting whatever else they are doing. Because of the Phobos
> vs Tango business D is not like this, and that is the one and only
> problem from my point of view.
>
> Peter 





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list