The great compromise of the D standard library

[Alexander Panek]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 18:05:17 -0400
Ender KaShae <astrothayne at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2.) Programmers are incouraged to contribute to the new standard
> library

Tango.Scrapple? Anyone?

> 3.) Walter will remain the final say on what contributions are added
> to the library

I don't think Walter has the /time/ to do so, and given the fact that
he wouldn't be the only one, or not even the main developer, working on
given standard runtime library, this seems suboptimal. I do think,
however, that Tango's developers are doing a pretty good job in that
regard, anyways.

> 4.) The name for the standard library will be neutral between Digital
> Mars and DSource

What do you mean with neutral? Also in what way is DSource directly
involved with this?

> I believe this compromise will address most of the issues though it
> would have to be agreed upon by both factions.  This has the
> additional advantage have creating a library with both low level
> procedural and higher level object-oriented parts.  This
> hybridization is one of the things that attracted me most to D in the
> first place.

I don't want to repeat myself, but: Tango does a pretty good job in
that regard, too, as it uses classes (which require object allocation,
mind you) only when it is (by design, not absolutely - we're not
talking C, after all) necessary, and provides freestanding functions
where they're sufficiant.

> as an aside I believe there should be a more standardized way to
> suggest changes to the D language 

In what way more standardized?

-- 
Alexander Panek <alexander.panek at brainsware.org>